MonteCarloSS.com

High nine's from zero liters (0 CID)

Posted By: MAP

High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/24/15 12:16 AM

Greetings,

Yes, a deliberate teaser of a title to attract attention. If the thread about 450hp from 2 liters was startling, perhaps this is even more so.

This person got his Fiero into the high-9 sec range by using two series-wound electric motors. The motor/battery combination reduced the weight of the car by very roughly 200 lb in the process as I recall:

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php/dc-plasma-build-thread-10sec-fiero-69476.html

The general forum entry point is here. I admit I've had close to zero time to digest the mountain of information to be had at this site:

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters... - 03/24/15 12:55 AM

Electric motors are much more efficent than IC engines. 85 -90 % efficiency for electric vs 18 %-20 % for most types of IC engines. Rockets which are a type of IC engine get 70% efficiency.

While that car is quick, I wonder what its travel range is between recharges? Batteries usually do not have the enegry storage capacity as a tank of fuel does.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters... - 03/24/15 05:02 AM

Hi Buick,

For all I know, a single full-power 1/4-mile run may exhaust the batteries! His data shows 850 battery hp (~630kW) peak during one such run.

For everyday driving I hope the range is longer, but if such a car is driven with a typical hotrodder's leadfoot in normal traffic, maybe some tens of miles can be had? One plus is that if the transmission doesn't free-wheel while coasting/decelerating, then the batteries should see a mild recharge as the electric motor functions as a generator.

However since I think most hotrods aren't driven for long stretches, maybe short range is an acceptable limitation for many.

Another factor not known to me as of yet: cost of the motors, controller, batteries, and transmission (he uses a single GV OD unit for two speeds.) And, relating to this, the life of the batteries. Since an electric motor's torque is limited by the supply voltage and the motor's back-EMF, which goes in direct proportion to rpm from Faraday's law, an electric motor's torque output tends to be much flatter than that of an ICE, so transmissions can have fewer speeds and thus be made smaller and lighter.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/24/15 06:06 PM

While electric cars aren't the environmental answer that people and politicians want them to be, they do have some pretty good useful benefits, like low operation cost and high torque...
I have an '85 S15 sitting unused with an electric conversion lingering in the back of my mind... I came close to pulling the trigger with a 30hp 230VAC motor and inverter combo (inverter could run off of something like a 320V DC bus input) that I could have sourced for scrap price from a previous employer, all that was left was the battery bank (something like 25 12v batteries) and charger setup (more challenging than it seems, unless you want to pay a bunch of money for a purchased system) plus physical install in the engine bay to the existing 4 speed. I chose to do the 5.3 swap in the Monte instead. Looking back, I should have grabbed the parts anyway for use at a later date... doh
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/27/15 07:08 PM

Hi Hunter, folks,

I think the lack of engagement in this thread, despite the teaser, has to do with the unfamiliarity, if not outright skepticism, about converting to an electric drivetrain. I count myself in this same camp of unfamiliar/skeptical. So in the interest of launching a joint journey of discovery, I found this "starter kit" in the aforementioned DIYelectric site:

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/wiki/

To me the enticements are:

1. No exhaust system - drivetrain is nearly silent.
2. Flexibility of drivetrain layout.
3. Compactness of drivetrain - a rear-engine configuration is far easier to execute than with a high-output ICE.
4. Potential viability for a transmission with only two ratios, with or without TC = reduced weight and cost.
5. Potential for a significant weight savings overall => handling and acceleration benefits.

But there are significant detriments too, such as the fact that the batteries would need to be replaced every several years. Cost remains a major unknown as well, but nowadays a high-output ICE drivetrain (let's say roughly 600-800 hp) with good reliability and reasonable (!) economy, is probably at least a $20k deal anyway.

Best,
MAP



Posted By: 1 Slow SS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/27/15 10:38 PM

I would think it's kinda obvious what electric motors can do seeing locomotives use them. They use diesel engines to power the electric motors.

A little info from online.

The hybrid diesel locomotive is an incredible display of power and ingenuity. It combines some great mechanical technology, including a huge, 12-cylinder, two-stroke diesel engine, with some heavy duty electric motors and generators, throwing in a little bit of computer technology for good measure.

This 270,000-pound (122,470-kg) locomotive is designed to tow passenger-train cars at speeds of up to 110 miles per hour (177 kph). The diesel engine makes 3,200 horsepower, and the generator can turn this into almost 4,700 amps of electrical current. The four drive motors use this electricity to generate over 64,000 pounds of thrust. There is a completely separate V-12 engine and generator to provide electrical power for the rest of the train. This generator is called the head-end power unit. The one on this train can make over 560 kilowatts (kW) of electrical power.
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/30/15 03:17 AM

GM used to have a electro motive division (EMD) that built diesel locomotives, until they sold it off to China a few years ago.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/21/15 09:29 PM

Hi Folks,

Thought I'd resurrect this thread from several months ago. In the interim, the Tesla P85D S model (with "ludicrous" mode,) specs were released, with:

2.8 sec 0-60 mph
10.9 sec 1/4-mile
1.1g maximum centripetal acceleration

285 mi (65 mph) cruising range
4,936 lb curb weight
1,500 lb battery weight
The 470 hp rear electric motor weighs 300lb.

A potential buyer "aeroscott" recently posted:

"Drove the 690hp all wheel drive beautiful black on black ' space ship' today in Sacramento . It was in the ludicrous mode but limited to 80 mph for test drive, which I promptly hit. I didn't ask about state of charge. Not even a hint of wheel spin, just the fastest acceleration I ever experienced . And that faint turbine sound is so hot! Such an easy car to drive, except for going much faster then it feels or sounds. Seats are improved since the first ones as is the interior. More Mercedes type of refinement. Thank you Jackson and the rest of the Tesla team."

Link: http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php/test-drive-tesla-s-p85d-138058.html

The first three numbers are impressive by themselves, but when we consider the last three as well, they become even more impressive. I studied the chassis of this car carefully at a mall in San Diego about two weeks ago, and considering what I saw and these numbers, I'm struck by:

1. If weight could be gotten down into the 3,500 lb range (by reducing battery size, mass, and energy mostly,) 10.9 sec could become about 9.2 sec. Yes, the range of the car would be much reduced, but for most hotrodders, that's probably not a problem.

2. The battery pack underlies the entire floor of the Tesla. This, plus the physical compactness of the driver motors, might place the COM of the car at as little as 12-14" above the ground, versus 22" (ish) for an A/G body. The handling benefits are obvious.

3. The P85D model S re-uses their stock 470 hp motor at the rear plus a 221 hp front motor. If they had developed a single, larger motor for the rear alone, they probably could have saved more weight. With such a low COM height, a more rear-heavy weight balance could be tolerated.

Other things I like:
4. No exhaust system = practically no noise.
5. No transmission.

About battery life, several years was common in the past, but Tesla told me they are up to 15 years nowadays.

I'd love to convert a G-body this way! (Now all I need is a gold mine and a few years with nothing to do to make this happen...)

Best,
MAP

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/21/15 10:45 PM

This video shows CR's testing of the roughly 700-hp Hellcat vs. the also roughly 700-hp Tesla. The contrast is striking! The Tesla is faster, but the real rush comes off the line. The Hellcat is soft off the line, but accelerates harder after 2.5 sec or so.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/07/10/the-...-hellcat-video/

To the 1/4 mile, the Tesla still wins, but the video makes me think that we can do better than both cars by using a very powerful ICE in a rear-engine position (the body shape of the Monte Carlo is unusually favorable for this.) See this thread:

http://www.montecarloss.com/community/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1021426&page=1

Best,
MAP
Posted By: ls1_monte

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/22/15 01:28 AM

If the Hellcat would hook directly off the line without peddling the throttle, I'd think the g force measurements would spike more like the tesla...
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/24/15 07:23 PM

Hi Lsi,

I think you're right. If we believe CR's tast data showing roughly 0.8g forward acceleration once the tires hook for the Hellcat, then this is quite impressive for RWD assuming that something like 50% of the car's static weight rests on its rear wheels.

But if we could shift more weight to the rear wheels, then we could accelerate even harder.

About electric motors, the torque reduces with increasing RPM because the effective drive voltage (rail voltage minus the motor's back-EMF,) drops in linear fashion with increased rpm. The only way to overcome this is to increase drive voltage with motor rpm, which is technically possible.

So I suppose my point is that there are still cards to play in this game to get even faster, and, incidentally, to stay with RWD with a single motor. The Tesla and Hellcat are amazing with about 11 sec 1/4-mile times - and especially considering that these cars are about 1/3 heavier than a typical MCSS! Weight reduction is key - that's how that Fiero in the first link is in the 9's in the 1/4-mile.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/24/15 10:48 PM

Hi Folks,

Lone Star racing (the folks with the 9-sec Fiero at the beginning of this thread,) are shown here with their Miata that does 0-60 mph in 1.5 seconds.

http://video.pbs.org/video/2365328431/

Look for the segment starting at 8:30 and ending at 13:06. It costs $1, or so they say, to "re-fuel" this car.

They claim that to be "really fast" costs $15k; to break records costs about $30k, and that once set-up the drivetrain requires very little maintenance.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 08/31/15 09:42 PM

Hi Folks,

A further update: I contacted Lonestar EV conversions to learn more about whether to proceed with the usual ICE front-motor/RWD approach to hotrodding, or to convince myself to go for an all-electric design.

The short of it is that I continue to see all-electric as the better route, amazingly enough.

Some posts back I wrote:

Quote:
To me the enticements are:

1. No exhaust system - drivetrain is nearly silent.
2. Flexibility of drivetrain layout.
3. Compactness of drivetrain - a rear-engine configuration is far easier to execute than with a high-output ICE.
4. Potential viability for a transmission with only two ratios, with or without TC = reduced weight and cost.
5. Potential for a significant weight savings overall => handling and acceleration benefits.


Updating this with Lonestar’s feedback:

The preferred path would be to put two electric motors (most probably the Netgain warp 9 or warp 11 design,) in the transmission tunnel. A transmission may not be needed at all, but if one were needed, a GV overdrive would probably cover the needed range of gearing more than adequately. The drivetrain would be coupled through a short drive shaft (18" may be all that's necessary,) to the existing live rear axle.

As such, the entire drivetrain would extend from the rear axle, forward to roughly the existing firewall location. The engine bay would then be left empty, save for steering, brakes, and AC (I leave those details for another time.) Lonestar recommended putting the battery pack in the engine bay, but I would definitely put it in the trunk. With a rear-heavy weight balance, I could get the car to do 0-60 in less than three seconds, and maybe even 2.5 seconds, even with street tires. Amazingly, they claim 200hp may be enough to get the job done. Low 1/4-mile times, however, would obviously require far more than 200hp, and that's where we need to add more weight in batteries and electric motors.

For a sub-three-second 0-60, we're looking at roughly 400lb in batteries with a 60-ish mile "normal" driving range, and about 200hp in motors and possibly transmission too. Motor life: probably about a million miles. The only maintenance would be with the commutator brushes. Battery life: if charged/discharged properly, about 2,000 cycles, or roughly ten years of typical life. Batteries would be replaced individually and not as a whole.

The net vehicle weight after conversion would probably be about 100lb lighter than a stock MCSS. We could break-down the mass contributions roughly as follows:

1. SBC motor and transmission: roughly 700lb, centered about 12” behind front axle.
2. Everything else in the car: roughly 2,900lb, centered exactly between the front and rear axles.
Resulting mass: 3,600lb total, centered about 46” behind the front axle ( = 57% front and 43% rear axle weight distribution.)
3. After removing the SBC motor and transmission, now add 200lb for the elecrtic motors/transmission, centered about 60” behind front axle.
4. Also add 400lb for the battery pack, centered about 22” behind the rear axle.
Resulting mass: 3,500lb total, centered about 63” behind the front axle ( = 42% front and 58% rear axle weight distribution.) I’d like to see an even greater fraction on the rear wheels!

Another benefit: the batteries and drivetrain are more vertically compact than the ICE equivalent, so the COM height for the car could be significantly reduced. I’m guessing this could go down from about 22” to roughly 19”, which would generally improve handling. Yet another benefit: with a more centrally-compact distribution of weight, and the yaw center moved closer to the rear axle, steering response should get much crisper/nimbler.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Motor City Monte

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 09/04/15 08:13 AM

there is an electric motor cycle out that get over 100 miles on full charge and it has DC charging and can have batteries back to 80% in 1 hour i think is what i read. and its just as fast and picks up speed almost at same rate as gas bike. no shifting 1 gear.

http://www.energicasuperbike.com/energica-ego-electric-superbike/
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 09/04/15 09:00 PM

Hi Motor City,

Good point, and I think the analogy carries over (at least partially) into a full car platform. I absolutely love the idea of using no transmission at all, or at the most, just a GV overdrive unit for two speeds. That's because for a gas motor, while powers are climbing year by year, transmission technology for the most part (at least on the aftermarket side,) isn't keeping pace. My experience over the years is that it's increasingly likely for me to experience some kind of transmission failure as power goes up, and the cost associated with such failures is very high. Transmissions are getting bigger, heavier, and more expensive too.

And as for the electric motors themselves, they have few parts, and last virtually forever. Replacing commutator brushes is as easy as changing jets on a carburetor, and then after that, bearings may have to be replaced every several 100k of miles or so. And the cost for this is very low. It's a dream from a simplicity and reliability standpoint. The biggest maintenance item is the batteries, but even those are a once-in-a-ten-year or so deal, and cells can be replaced individually when they go bad.

Plus: no exhaust system. No, or practically no, cooling system. Electric motors are roughly 90% efficient, as opposed to the 30% top efficiency of a gas motor. Oh, and a big reduction in fueling cost.

I've only found one hurdle, and admittedly, it's a very big one: cost of conversion. I was quoted roughly $50k (gulp!) to convert an MCSS to get the performance into the realm of a Tesla P85D S, or a Hellcat. That's not exactly pocket change, although it could be argued that just going out and buying one of those cars (where's the fun in that?) certainly wouldn't be any cheaper.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/14/19 09:16 PM

Hi Folks,

In 2019, and 3.5 years since the last post, I thought this would be a good time to resurrect this highly worthwhile thread. I'd urge a quick re-read of it from top to bottom. If anything, given an electric drivetrain's greater traction (pun intended) in the mainstream of current automotive thought, there is greater incentive to do this now than ever before. I see the advantages of an electric drivetrain, and especially for an MCSS, to be unusually attractive, since the MCSS platform stands to benefit more than most from a COM shift downward and rearward. Plus, there's that huge trunk by today's automotive standards...

Surely some forward-thinking hotrodder out there is thinking about making a go of this? (That would have been me but the time and money weren't there. What can I say: life and family obtrude.)

Any fresh thoughts on this topic?

Thanks; best,
MAP
Posted By: Fred SS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/17/19 12:08 AM

MAP, I think you are on the right track. I think electric drivetrain conversions will become popular someday. The one big obstacle right now is cost followed by the lack of recharging infrastructure. We are car guys and cannot stop tinkering. Someone will do an electric Monte Carlo SS conversion someday and that day is not far off.

I recently gave up on my gas powered lawn mower. Would not run right. No matter what I did. Cleaned, adjusted but still would die. My friend talked me into buying an electric mower, Lowes Kobalt brand. Best decision I ever made. Has plenty of power to cut high grass. It automatically ramps up speed when it gets into high grass. I have a 1/4 acre. I can cut the entire front yard and half the back yard on one charge. Mower comes with two batteries. That one experience sold me on electric. I am waiting on a company to build an electric pickup truck.

Fred
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/17/19 05:24 AM

Hi Fred,

Interesting reply. You're exactly one electric lawnmower ahead of me (!) For me, a really powerful ICE-based powertrain is risky due to the unknown of the transmission (at least if it's an automatic.) Aftermarket claims for HP and TQ limits for transmissions are still usually shaky and usually optimistic. At least GM E-rod transmission offerings are conservative, but at about $6k for the 90 TQ series, that's a big, heavy, and expensive transmission, and it needs an electronic controller. I absolutely love the fact that a single GV overdrive unit can handle all shifting for electric motor(s).

The cost of electric conversion is still high, but folks are picking up used Tesla battery packs from wrecks and putting them to good use as I understand it. Chances are as time goes by and more electric drivetrains from wrecks become available, the cost of conversion will come down too.

And on the flip side, the cost of a very powerful ICE motor/tranny combination is rising. So, on the whole, the cost gap is closing.

But even with a sizeable cost gap, the handling and traction benefits alone of going all-electric with an MCSS are mighty attractive. That's the problem with staying with an ICE: as the combination gets more and more TQ and HP, the front end of the car gets heavier and heavier, so all that extra output just goes to turn tires into smoke. And the car plows worse through turns. Not so with electric...

Who can resist?!

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/17/19 07:27 PM

I am not a big fan of ICE lawn mowers engines as most seem to be low quality. They are pretty much built to be disposable, not long lasting and easily serviced. Most of them do not even use connecting rod bearings! That is why I also have an electric push mower. However, I also have an ICE lawn tractor and a 1946 farm tractor for big mowing jobs.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/20/19 08:21 PM

New just today:

https://www.foxnews.com/auto/chevys-electric-camaro-can-do-wheelies

9.837s 1/4 mile, 750lb of batteries, which could probably be reduced for folks not interested in long highway range. And then this quote from the same article:

"Chevy doesn’t yet have plans to sell a turnkey eCOPO, but it is considering offering the electric setup as a crate motor someday." (Italics mine.)

Be sure to click on the link to watch the 9-sec blast. One of the things that stood out to me was the lack of exhaust roar which surely would have been prominent with an ICE engine. I know many hotrodders love that sound, and I respect that opinion, but for me, it's nothing more than unwanted noise.

I can't wait for the crate motor. I only hope my wallet will be ready in time!

Best,
MAP
Posted By: mmc427ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 12:03 AM

There has been talk about putting speakers at the back bumpers to make an exhaust sound. The neighbor has a Focus, I almost walked out in front of that car cause I didn't hear it coming.

Maybe they can recreate that "fart can" muffler sound the kids put on their Honda's.
Bob
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 02:58 AM

Hi Bob,

Any sound can be reproduced. The automotive industry has been doing it for a while now, and it will become more common. The two major areas of interest are "engine enhancements" modes (usually the fourth engine intake harmonic,) and interior cabin noise cancellation.

But as far as I know the OEMs aren't interested in creating what most people outside of the hot-rodding community would consider to be noise. A sound created as a warning in the interest of navigational safety might be another matter, however.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: mmc427ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 03:34 AM

Kinda like a backup alarm on a forktruck.
Gotta love it.
Bob
Posted By: PB86SS/87LS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 02:17 PM

Very interesting. A response to anyone who's annoying about LS swaps and thinks they are the end all be all, this might replace them at some point in the next wave. Might be awhile before they are cost effective but this will be the future.

The sound thing could be fun, people could choose any traditional V8, turbo sound, a fart can Honda. I'd personally want it to sound like the Jetson's car.
Posted By: Travis Jones

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by PB86SS/87LS
Very interesting. A response to anyone who's annoying about LS swaps and thinks they are the end all be all, this might replace them at some point in the next wave. Might be awhile before they are cost effective but this will be the future.

The sound thing could be fun, people could choose any traditional V8, turbo sound, a fart can Honda. I'd personally want it to sound like the Jetson's car.


The one area where electric powered vehicles will struggle vs gasoline powered vehicles is road racing. The batteries lack the energy density and add a bunch of weight.

They are very good at getting a car moving from a stand still though.

Personally, I'd choose the mario kart motor sound.
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 03:50 PM

As tech advances, the LS family will be seen as dino engines for grandpas, as it happens to everything. The new LT1s are already outmoding them. But it kind of proves one of my concerns with electric drives. Nothing becomes outdated faster than electronics, which electric drivetrains would be very dependent on, more so then even LS engines. What if they change the design of the charging ports every few years so older electric cars become useless? Or GM keeps a lot of information on hos to work on them private for only its dealers?
Posted By: Travis Jones

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by Buick Runner
As tech advances, the LS family will be seen as dino engines for grandpas, as it happens to everything. The new LT1s are already outmoding them. But it kind of proves one of my concerns with electric drives. Nothing becomes outdated faster than electronics, which electric drivetrains would be very dependent on, more so then even LS engines. What if they change the design of the charging ports every few years so older electric cars become useless? Or GM keeps a lot of information on hos to work on them private for only its dealers?


I'm not too worried about electric car problems. I wont buy one until the government forces me to.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/21/19 10:03 PM

Hi Folks,

Some thoughts about the last few posts:

1. Tesla S does 0-60 in 2.276s. 1.1-1.2g lateral acceleration. Those numbers speak for themselves, despite a whopping 4,891lb curb weight. Again, for me, I'd reduce the battery pack weight a bunch since I wouldn't plan on long-distance highway driving. The extra weight of the batteries is beneath the floorboards, and the total e-motor/tranny weight is a good deal less than the equivalent in an ICE engine/tranny equivalent. Since the e-motor weight and size is a lot less than the ICE equivalent, the COM (Center Of Mass) can be made much lower in the chassis.
2. In combination with the battery-pack COM, the COM of the vehicle could be reduced quite a bit compared to an ICE equivalent. Case in point: Tesla model S COM is 18" above the ground, compared to probably around 23" for a typical MCSS. A lower COM means more consistent/controllable handling while the car is undergoing various modes of acceleration: say, heavy braking while cornering, which would through a nose-heavy like an MCSS into a tailspin if the rear suspension has enough roll stiffness for it to handle without excessive understeer under normal conditions.
3. A battery-pack/e-motor combination allows a lot more flexibility in chassis placement than an ICE motor/tranny combination does. This means the vehicle's COM location in x,y can be adjusted for best handling and traction balance. If we now add the z aspect mentioned previously, that generally means a translation of the COM toward the rear and downward too, both of which can be quite beneficial to handling.
4. Not to get too technical, but there would probably be a big reduction in Izz moment of inertia, so crisper steering response.
5. Charging: the car just needs a regulated DC voltage source. The technology here is old and very mature. In fact, connecting a car to a charger could be accomplished with a pair of jumper cables, exactly the way a dead battery is jump-started. Beyond this, it's just a matter of connector configuration. I'd plan on charging at home, so I'd need to invest in an inverter/regulator station. Of course this factors into total conversion cost. On the flip side, the cost to charge electrically is way less than the cost of gas for the same type of driving.

HTH,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/22/19 07:12 AM

I know of one story of a guy who rebuilt a wecked Tesla in San Diego, but he can't get in running because he is locked out of the software needed to reactivate it, which Tesla refuses to help him with. Tesla also refuses to sell certain replacement parts to the general public, only to its dealership techs. Moreover, everything in Teslas, including the charging are controlled by software that must be updated regularly through Wifi. Another case of a rebuilt Tesla owner getting screwed over in New Zealand, where the owner is denied software updates needed to recharge his batteries in an hour. Without those updates, he can only recharge at a slow rate that takes several hours. These are just a couple of examples of shenanigans I fear will happen with EV swaps.

I could see GM only selling and shipping crate EV kits to its dealership techs who must installl it for you, for a rather large fee. After so many years, GM may drop software update support for your setup, much like how Microsoft, Apple, and the other computer scab companies force people to keep buying new products through planned obsolescence. I fear that one issue with EV in general is the opportunity for increased abuse of planed obsolescence they offer to car manufacturers who have historically been scabby themselves. It is quite a business ethics issue that needs to be resolved.

Lets say EVs become more common place in the future, would the government ban the sale of gas and use of ICE? Or would the supply of such fuels simply become rare and expensive? Many of the car manfacturers are even planing of moving away from B2C sales of private cars, and instead B2B sales of cars to public ride share firms or run ride share firms themselves. Some experts even think there will be no more privately owned cars within 20 years. A lot of issues that need to be setteled.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/22/19 08:08 AM

Hi Buick,

Lots of interesting points, and I don't pretend to be an expert so I can address all of them. But I don't think GM would get involved with any aspect of old drivetrain removal and/or new e-motor/battery installation. It just doesn't make sense from a business perspective, and the liability is likely to be too risky.

So, to make this feasible like their current E-ROD program, the system(s) would need to be simple enough from an installation and maintenance standpoint to make it attractive to the typical hotrodder. If not, it would only hurt their bottom line. So, by definition, I think the software aspect would have to be pretty basic, robust, and probably with little to no access for the owner. That said, it's not clear how much software control really needs to exist. I don' t see the system as being that complex.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/22/19 08:25 AM

Hi Map, I don't really know as I am no computer expert either, perhaps Bitflipper could shine some light on this subject? My own persomal feeling is that Teslas are probably overly complex and a crate EV kit would probably be more streamlined than a normal production EV driveline. Even the Erod is a more simple and streamline version of the normal production LS3. Also with the Erod, its computer can't be reflashed without voiding its legality, crate EV kits would likely be similar. I would think the charging software is likely as a safety feature to prevent overcharging which could lead to fires or killing the batteries. It probably also monitors and displays how much of a charge is left.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/23/19 10:18 PM

Hi Buick,

I think you're exactly right. Let's hope GM decides to release that e-motor/battery/(tranny?) combination sooner rather than later.

I'll put it this way: if I could get a conventional gas-based drivetrain to give me the location of COM that I'd like, that alone would suffice for me. The COM of MCSSs is too high, and too far forward, for best handling and traction.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/25/19 04:56 PM

You know, a "Crate" electric drivetrain that was the size and rough shape of a V8 and TH350 has the potential to be pretty slick. Give it a tailshaft housing that fits an existing driveshaft slipyoke, maybe even a cable drive for the speedo. Pack the motor in the trans tunnel with a gearbox if needed, then the controller, and possibly some batteries together with a throttle cable hookup where the carb should be, and use the traditional motor and transmission mount locations. Then include a bunch of battery bricks with it to be mounted where space allows on the particular vehicle, then wired up to the main unit for more capacity...
An installer could pull the standard unit out, drop the main unit in place without fabricating mounts or piecing systems together, wire up as many additional batteries as needed, and hit the road running.
Future options could have a power unit that had electric AC/heat pump and Power Steering pumps in a unit that could be mounted underhood and plumbed into existing systems. If GM sold a crate like that, I think they's have some business.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/25/19 07:20 PM

Hi Hunter,

That does sound clever. But I'm also thinking that because an electric motor is a lot more compact than an ICE for the same output, that motor could be slid toward the rear into the tranny/driveshaft tunnel. Also, due to the very broad torque curve of electric motors, which, unlike ICEs, actually have their peak torque at 0 rpm, they don't need multi-speed transmissions as do ICEs. That's why a two-speed transmission like a GV overdrive unit could suffice. Many e-enthusiasts don't use any tranny at all, come to think of it. And no torque converter. The main justification for seems to be that we don't want the electric motor(s) to spin excessive rpms where the back-EMF unduly reduces torque output per unit supply voltage.

Personally, I'd be happy to live with a compromise where I'd make a reasonable enlargement to the tranny/ driveshaft tunnel in order to handle an enlarged diameter of electric motor(s) if I thought the extra torque would warrant it.

So there you have it: develop a motor/tranny combination that would fit the bill you're proposing, Hunter, but limit diameter so shifting the drivetrain rearward into (a potentially modified) driveshaft tunnel would be feasible. With electric motors, this is easy: if you can't get torque by increasing diameter, then get it by increasing length. Or, connect multiple motors in series, mechanically. Once again, the flexibility of electric over ICE entices.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/25/19 10:07 PM

A decent DC motor is about 10-12" outside diameter, right? That's about the size of the main body of most transmissions, then either a 2 speed GV unit or just a slip-yoke would fit easily and not alter driveshaft placement. Then the area formerly occupied by the bellhousing and engine would be available for batteries and electronics. Not ideal for weight placement, but for a "Crate Engine" option it would be much easier to drop in place and retrofit...
For max performance benefit, ditch the existing driveshaft and extend the second motor to the driveshaft tunnel. At that point, modifications would be expected but the folks going after that would be much more adapted to cutting body panels than someone who wants a Crate option.
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/25/19 11:12 PM

Any kind of body surgery will likely be a turnoff for most people sitting on the fence of a E conversion. A lot of wenchers do not know how to weld or want to invest time and especially money into learning how to weld and buying the expensive equipment besides the involved safety hazzards. A pure bolt in system will be much more marketable than a system that will require extensive body modifications. A crate crate kit is a less is more situation, less work, more appealing. Even a pure bolt in engine swap is still plenty of hard work.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/25/19 11:57 PM

Hi Folks,

All very valid points. KIS(S) wins again. Maybe they can offer two motor diameters: one with less output, but that would fit inside an unaltered body, and a second one that would only differ in diameter for higher output and that would require "mild" floor modification. No other differences between the two. Or, maybe better yet, two motors in mechanical series, again to fit a stock body. A short driveshaft in the back would need double CV joints, but no problem. Even if we allocate two feet length each for a driveshaft, tranny, and each of two e-motors, we'd be at 96" length total, which would still place the front edge of the drivetrain a few inches back of the engine crossmember centerline. Nice indeed!

Best,
MAP

Posted By: SickSpeedMonte

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/27/19 04:50 PM

I was driving my '93 K3500 the other day with it's 6.5 turbo diesel (225 hp, 400 ft-lb) pulling a ~7000 lb trailer up some and down decent terrain. I was thinking it would be really cool to replace the forward driveshaft, which goes from the T-case to a carrier bearing for the rear driveshaft, with an electric motor. The motor could give you a few extra hp when you need it and act as a regenerative engine brake going downhill. Apparently the 4L80e in my truck isn't very good for transmitting reverse torque through the overrun clutches.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/28/19 08:15 PM

Interesting, SSM!

I should have heeded my own advice better, and re-read the entire thread carefully. One thing I spotted is that Tesla's battery pack came down from 1,500lb in 2015 to 750lb today. I haven't checked typical highway range with these battery packs, but I assume it's in Tesla's typical range of somewhere around 300mi. As I wrote on several occasions, I, and I suspect many hotrodders, would be happy with a fraction of that range because we don't typically drive our cars just for utilitarian point A to point B transportation.

If you scroll back to the 8/31/15 post about feedback from Lonestar EV conversions, you can see a more detailed and certain estimate of an EV drivetrain configuration for an MCSS than what I've offered, admittedly only by memory, in more recent posts.

Thanks,
MAP

Posted By: Witness86SS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/28/19 08:29 PM

Wonder what could be done with an electro magnetic torque converter.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 02/28/19 08:43 PM

Hi Witness,

I see there's recent patent activity here: I need to learn more about it. Boiled down to essentials, all torque converters trade-off between torque multiplication and angular speed multiplication to provide a better mechanical impedance match between prime-mover side and load side. Or, in simple terms, it mimics a gearset. Of course, with fluid or E-M coupling, the ratio is variable and possibly adjustable, which holds various benefits. But all, at best, conserve mechanical energy. So as usual, no free lunch: that's why all torque converters get hot.

In the meantime, here's a great video from Motorweek talking about an EV Miata that does 0-60 in 1.5s and the quarter-mile in 8.9 s. Lonestar EV conversions "John Metric" is the business owner.

http://www.motorweek.org/features/over_the_edge/ev_drag_racing

Disclaimer: I have no business incentive whatsoever to mention this vendor, but their name does seem to pop-up more often than others with respect to high-performance EV conversions. For this reason alone, I'm citing them frequently here. If anyone has other sources we should know about, please chime in!

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/01/19 02:00 AM

One issue with playing with electric powertrains is the high voltage. EV powertrains can use as much as 650 volts, which is fatal. I looked at tools designed for working on hybrids and EVs and they are expensive. High voltage gloves start at $80, and must be regularly checked for wear as even a pinhole can kill you. Plus the special insulated wrenches, ratchets, extensions, and other safety tools can cost up to 100s of dollars each. There is even a insulated rescue hook for helpers to pull a shocked tech to safety. This why I am afraid that EV conversions may be out of the realm of the DIY due to the increased safety concerns with working on such systems that require professional safety training. Selling such systems as a DIY crate kit toward amaturs may just be too much liability. If GM evers sells such a kit it probably would be a combo product, install, and service plan package due to the greater safety requirements.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/01/19 08:01 AM

Hi Buick,

The voltage associated with spark plugs is actually at least an order of magnitude greater than that, and yet that's been made safe. The trick is proper insulation, proper grounding, and proper safety procedures when handling. That's not to dismiss the problem since what you say is correct, but I'm sure the problem is tractable.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/02/19 01:07 AM

The energy to spark plugs has low current, (low amps). This makes it similar to static electricity, enough to give either a painful shock or burn, but generally not enough current to electroute you. In fact, the energy does not even travel inside the ignition wire, but through the EM field surrounding the wire. The ignition coil is basically a mini Tesla coil.

It takes about 100 to 200 amps to kill a person. While an ICE battery has 500 or more amps, the voltage is so low it is easily insulated. Furthermore, only the starter pulls such high amps, the rest of an ICE's electrical system doesn't amps as high as the starter. High voltage like 650 is more difficult to insulate and has a greater chance of "leaking" through any path to ground. This makes working on a hybird or EV similar to working on high tension lines, thus requiring far greater safety precautions than with ICE. Even just working outside over dirt would be a bad idea because moist soil is a perfect path to ground with high voltage and why outdoor outlets are required to be GCFI.

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/02/19 04:34 AM

Hi Buick,

I think you mean that it takes about 100mA-200mA to kill a person. Survival is more likely when the current is lower and higher than this range. The worst conductive path would be through the heart. Here's a simple primer on the topic:

https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/p616/safety/fatal_current.html

Coming back to spark plugs, the danger depends not only on the peak instantaneous current, which is still determined by the spark voltage (typically 20kV,) and the resistance posed by the body to ground, but also on the length of time that that current is present. Since most systems are CD discharge, that current should decay with an exponential envelope over time. Because of this dynamic nature, maybe total energy delivered is a better indicator of lethality.

Anyway, I don't think it's especially helpful to dwell on this aspect of EV conversions because the problem must be fundamentally tractable. If it weren't, then: 1. Companies like Tesla would be facing massive litigation due to electrocution injuries, and: 2. GM wouldn't be indicating that they're thinking of providing an e-motor kit. There's more circumstantial evidence than just this, but I think this is enough to establish that we're not looking at an insurmountable problem.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/02/19 06:03 AM

Darn spell checker "corrected" milliamps on me.

Tesla generally frowns on any non approved personal tinkering on their cars, but that is the general norm for the auto industry, especially with high end brands. Through Tesla may be somewhat justified with the safety issues with dealing with high voltages. However, a set of high voltage gloves would be wise investment when working on such systems yourself. [video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9WWVMDih9s[/video]
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/02/19 09:22 PM

Hi Buick,

That's great advice, of course, notwithstanding that I'm posturing for not making too big a deal out of this. But at the same time, I'm certainly not saying we should ignore this. Always better safe than sorry.

But I'd appeal that we get back to center about EV conversions as a path to performance, and not to electrocution.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/02/19 11:18 PM

Researching safety with hybrids and EVs, they do have a few safety features that should be included in any possible EV crate kit. Current hybrids and EVs usually have a a master disconnect right at thd battery and many have a second master disconnect inside the passenger compartment, generally in the center console. This allows a any occupants inside the car or responders to kill high voltage in case of an accident.

Another issue is weight. A Tesla battery pack weighs a 1,000 pounds, and on some models is bolted to the bottom of the floor pan (IMO not a great place with the effects of winter salt). While a running SBC weighs nearly half that at 535 lbs combined with 125 lbs for s TH 2004R plus 41 pounds for thd TC. While a Tesla powertrain weighs 350 pounds. So roughly 1,350 pounds vs 701 pounds for a stock powetrain. EV swap will likely require higher weight capacity suspension springs and even frame and body reinforcement, which G bodies require anyway for any power upgrades.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/04/19 10:08 PM

Hi Buick,

I've said repeatedly that I wouldn't use 1,000lb of batteries because I, and I suspect many others, don't expect a 300-mile driving range for a hotrod. You're also forgetting about 80lb for a half-filled gas tank, about 100lb for an exhaust system, about 40lb for a stock battery, and about 50lb for a filled cooling system.

Buick, please, this tone is getting wearisome.

On edit: I think I somewhat misjudged your intention. I understand you're trying to provide useful information. But with that in mind, let's please agree to move on from the topic of whether EV conversions can be made safe. I'm confident that they can, in just the same way that driving a bomb commonly called a car, filled with a high explosive known as gasoline, that's ignited by a high-tension voltage that could kill or maim, can be made safe too.

Now, back to weight: I contend that an EV conversion that has enough range for around-town fun driving, could be made lighter than a stock MCSS, and with a weight distribution that would be far more favorable to good handling and good traction than factory. Scroll up to my post from 8-31-15 where I calculate that a 400lb battery pack would reduce the stock MCSS weight by about 100lb. And actually, even this estimate is low, because the 2,900lb deadweight inherent in the car aside from 700lb for an SBC and transmission, includes the weights I cited at the top of this post. If you deduct the additional 270lb of that collection of parts needed for the ICE configuration, we come out about 370lb net lighter with a 400lb battery pack, compared to stock.

BTW another nice example of the flexibility of electric is that it's fairly easy to add or subtract battery pack capacity depending on one's driving preferences/needs.

About the chassis needing reinforcement for a high-output drivetrain: if you look at my thousands of posts over the years in the rolling chassis section, you'll see that I firmly believed (and still believe) that the stock frame/body configuration sorely needed a major increase of stiffness no matter the engine output. Over the years my thought evolved in the direction of getting maximum stiffness in relation to weight by converting to a unibody platform. The A/G-body chassis was noticeably floppy even back in the day, but by today's standards, it's a sorry bowl of Jello. Separately, stiffening the chassis specifically for surviving high drivetrain torque will be needful no matter the nature of prime mover.

Do hope this helps settle some issues; let's get back to a more positive cadence.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/05/19 04:28 AM

Hi Map, I brought up the disconnects as something that should be in the list of items in a crate kit, much like how the Erod comes with an OBD2 port. Some other considerations would be how to power the vacuum brake booster? Most likely solution would be either an electric vacuum pump or a electric hydraulic booster like GNs use. EVs still use liquid cooling like most automotive grade ICEs, and this will require plumbing considerations as well as placing and wiring the coolant pumps for both the motor and battery pack. I do not know if a stock radiator would be enough or if a specialized radiator will be required? Perhaps a crate kit may just simply use air cooling for the battery?

Looking at current hybrids and EVs, they are pretty much two main electrical systems. The high voltage system for powering the drivetrain, (not going on about safety here), and a 12 volt system that uses a seperate 12 volt battery for powering secondary systems. The two are connected by a hi/lo transformer that acts as a voltage regulator in a ICE car. So I would think such a kit would need a harness with blank circuits for various subsystems and customization. Similar to how most Police package cars come with extra blank circuits for wiring up various equipment setups that are customized to each department.

I
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/05/19 07:59 PM

Hi Buick,

Electrical motors typically run at 85-90% efficiency while ICE runs at about 30%, so for equal mechanical output power, electrical motors generate only 15-20% of the thermal power that ICEs do. The cooling system therefore needs much less capacity. I know many EV conversions rely only on air cooling. 12VDC for things like lights, brake vacuum pump, etc: a transformer presumes an AC EV system. Many are still DC, so an inverter would be required ahead of a transformer. Or, use PWM with a low-pass filter. Or, maybe the 12 VDC system would be entirely independent save for a mechanically-driven 12VDC (ish) alternator - several possibilities here.

best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/06/19 02:50 AM

Air cooling would save weight, however, liquid cooling is more effective, especially with high performance and severe duty.

Thinking about a EV kit, I wonder if it would even resemble a ICE crate kit? Teslas seem to use a motor combined into a transaxle like assembly for their drive train. Perhaps a EV crate kit could take the form of a rear axle swap with the drive motor built into it? Though unlike engines, rear axles dimensions vary widely from car model to car model under the same brand, which could be a problem. Ie, while Cameros, Monte Carlos, and Caprices use engines with identical external dimensions, each model has rear axles designed for each platform unlike the universal fit of their shared SBC engine.
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/06/19 06:52 PM

for the 12V system, I've seen an alternator essentially mounted to the driveshaft and going straight to the existing vehicle 12V system that powers the traditional accessories, but a step down transformer isn't too hard either.
I still think the shape of an SBC350/TH350 setup would be perfect, because what hotrod can't fit a 350/350? Make the rear transmission mount location flexible so it can drop in place of a PG/350/400/4L60/4L80, and it would be near universal. The end user would have to make sure the driveshaft was appropriately rated, and possibly have to shorten/lengthen if you had an oddball original tailshaft housing, but I think with some clever math it could work. It would also still allow flexibility for gear ratio changes for different uses without needlessly complicating the part number variations from GM. i.e., you get a max of 4000 driveshaft rpm's, select tire diameter and rear gear appropriately.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/07/19 05:34 AM

Hi Folks,

My inclination is to think that the car's existing rear axle would be retained, and a shortened driveshaft would be used. Some further thoughts:

1. If the driveshaft is shortened a lot, then UV joints would need to switch to CV joints to transmit motion without UV cogging with high suspension deflections.
2. If the COM is shifted far rearward, then high live-axle anti-squat can be foregone and an IRS used instead for better handling.
3. An EV drivetrain could indeed fit inside the space occupied by a 350/350 package, but then the car's COM would be farther forward than it could be otherwise. OTOH, if the batteries all fit where the current gas tank is (plus encroaching the space of the spare wheel,) then maybe a weight distribution of 45/55 (ish) might be attainable? (45/55 is off the top of my head; I could be wrong here.) I'd rather see 40/60 for more rear-wheel traction for hard launches. This is probably about the point where an IRS starts to look very attractive.
4. An integrated drivetrain/axle assembly could be kitted as you say, Buick, but I think you're right that getting various width and front-rear fitments might be too complex for the OEM.

Let's hope someone from GM is reading here? My friend in GM powertrain probably isn't interested because he says he has "high octane" in his blood (!) (Yes, friendly dig for you, Gerry!)

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 03/23/19 10:34 PM

Hi Folks,

Just came across this video from last year's SEMA show where they talk about the E-COPO Camaro. 700hp, 600 lb-ft, 1/4-mile in the nines. They briefly mention the drivetrain configuration, which rather surprisingly includes a THM-400. The battery pack, however, seems to be minimized to supply energy for just four 1/4-mile runs, so it's probably too small for reasonable range on the street, which might also explain such good performance from a rather modest motor output: the car is probably quite light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiF-JfdTnC0

The first four minutes cover the regular ICE-configuration COPO Camaro; the discussion of the E version starts right after that. My opinion again is not to use two motors for front and rear axles as GM did, but rather a single motor pack coupled only to the rear wheels. Of course, you need a significant rear-heavy weight bias to get the requisite traction, but I believe this can benefit handling too.

Best,
MAP

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/21/19 09:27 PM

Greetings,

A few disjointed updates:

1. A quick web check on current R&D reveals that billions of dollars are being invested globally in advancing battery technology. Toyota is investing the most. The key targets for improvement are recharging time, and energy per unit mass. Two technologies seem to be close to breakthrough: one is in the area of a solid electrolyte (e.g., the "quantum glass" battery), and the other is a liquid electrolyte battery that would be replenished at battery depletion in the same way, and using much of the same public infrastructure supposedly, as gas is pumped into a conventional ICE car. The claims I've seen for both technologies are something like a factor of 3-5 improvement of energy/mass over current lithium-ion battery technology, and a great reduction of recharging time. If realized, the energy/mass improvement would remove hundreds of pounds of battery mass from current electric cars. Both new technologies conserve lithium as the main anode/cathode element.

2. No word on what Panasonic is up to, which reportedly supplies Tesla, but the global picture is very clear that the pace and intensity of battery research for electric vehicles is impressive. The economic stakes are enormous, and NDAs are undoubtedly in place, tending to restrict how much the general public may know.

3. Despite all I've written here, I've never driven an electric car. Riding as a passenger in a first-gen Prius was as close as I've ever gotten. The main recollections were the lack of exhaust noise and faster-than-you-can-blink torque right off the line. I'll aim to rent a Tesla in Phoenix at some time hopefully not far in the future. Question: can anyone reading here provide additional insight to compare/contrast driving an electric car versus a gas car? Any surprises, pro or con?

I can't help wondering, who will be the first to convert an MCSS to an electric powertrain? I'm actually rather surprised it hasn't happened already.

My goals, assuming someday I actually get to do this: 0-60 mph about 2.5s This is 1.1g on average, so with only the rear axle driven, I'd definitely need sticky tires and a significantly rear-heavy weight balance. I'm less concerned about 1/4-mile time since I'd only drive the car on the street, but let's say 11s maximum. Cruising range assuming a measure of restraint with the throttle: 60 miles minimum. I'd rather keep battery mass low and sacrifice some range than the converse. Poster "John Metric" (Lonestar EV conversions, the folks of the 9-sec Fiero cited here at the outset,) at the DIY electric car forum claims to have gotten 2,000hp "BLDC" from a 215-lb electric motor. Compare this to 500hp and about 410lb for the ICE LS-7 motor.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/22/19 01:16 PM

I've seen something about the liquid electrolyte before. I think that has tremendous potential, because a "Recharge" now just looks like pulling up to a filling station and pumping a tank full of fuel, then get back on the road. Maybe you have the additional step of draining the spent fuel, but this would actually make electrics viable for long distance and unplanned use which currently kills their utility for most people.
90% of my driving is commuting back and forth to the office, about 30 miles round trip. This seems like a great case for an electric car, but unfortunately, sometimes I get in to work and find out that I need to visit one of our other locations 30 miles away, and the odds of having a charging station along the way or at the destination are pretty low. A Tesla would fill that role, as would a Chevy Volt, but the majority of pure electrics would not.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/22/19 08:09 PM

Hi Hunter,

Great point. An average commute may only be a fraction of my 60-mile goal, but what if an emergency happens that would force a drive beyond this limit? It comes down to statistics. What probability of exceeding an x-mile range are we comfortable tolerating? One part in a hundred? A million? Obviously the big OEMs have taken a hard look at this and have decided that for most people, whatever sigma level may correspond to x, x needs to be about 300 miles. But what if the car is a hotrod, driven more for fun than for business? More than for a commute? Maybe x under those special conditions could be much smaller. That's how I'm approaching this...

Plus the nice thing is that if x turns out to be too small, it shouldn't be overly difficult to add more battery capacity. Just package the batteries in a space with a reasonable margin for future expansion. The OEM favors under the floorboards. With no exhaust system to eat-up vertical space, that's probably feasible, although the rear footwells may need to be raised.

I think anyone considering to do this needs to have a backup plan for the worst-case scenario where the charge is gone, and a source of electricity is nowhere close. I'm guessing the final backup is a gas-powered generator that can provide the requisite voltage and current. That, or pay for a tow. Again, if you've got the engineering and technical chops to do an EV conversion, then more than likely you can probably identify a good target for reasonable range and thus battery capacity. YMMV. Pun very intended.

In practice I think this is how this will play out:

1. The electrical energy of a capacitor (or a battery) is 1/2CV^2.
2. Analogous to a gas gauge, one would have an energy gauge on the dash.
3. Once energy is depleted to 50%, it's time to drive to the nearest charging station while under minimum throttle. In other words, you drive the car the same way you fly a plane: you very much mind the point of no return.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/22/19 08:34 PM

Hi Folks,

I found a Lance-like (apologies for turning your name into an adjective, Lance!) thread at the DIY electric car forum of someone who's doing a careful EV conversion on a 1968 Mustang. It looks like he's going through many of the same issues we would encounter if we did an EV conversion on an MCSS. The project is still on progress, but it looks like a great thread to watch.

https://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showthread.php/68-musla-176890p5.html?highlight=monte

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/23/19 01:19 AM

With EV range and charging rates, Tesla has some questionable practices. The mileage range for Teslas is programable, and it costs something lije an extra 10k for extended range, and there is no difference in the battery hardware. They just program the car through wifi to enable increased charge capacity. In a case of a emergency evacuation, Tesla wil temporary program all the base models cars to enable extended ranges.

Another way Tesla further monitizes its cars is that it has a upcharge subscription service for faster charging. If you do not pay the upcharge, you can only charge the car at a slower rate. Business schools teach to charge extra for any kind of convenience, which Tesla must see expedited charging as. Hopefully Tesla's marketing practices won't be adopted as norms by other companies for the EV industry.
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/23/19 01:41 PM

MAP,
I agree with your analysis, and congratulations, I believe we just re-invented the Chevy Volt smile
I've considered a conversion on an S10 I have, and figured I would eventually end up with a solar panel bed cover to try to recoup range during the day, and would plug in each night. But my problem is currently that I have a 25 mile round trip to work, and even at 13 mpg in my daily driver Yukon Denali, it will take years to pay off an electric conversion and I still would not sell the Yukon, since I've got 4 kids and I have to drive them places occasionally. Economically, I can't even justify buying a 90-something Civic within a 2-3 year payback on gas savings.
As a hot rod/fun car, that becomes a different calculation but unfortunately the same budget for now, which is not much. I'd probably still EV the S10 before I did the Monte, for whatever end goal I had... But yes, each of our mileages vary considerably.
Posted By: AkronAero

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/23/19 01:57 PM

From Buick Runner's comments - "Another way Tesla further monitizes its cars is that it has a upcharge subscription service for faster charging. If you do not pay the upcharge, you can only charge the car at a slower rate. Business schools teach to charge extra for any kind of convenience, which Tesla must see expedited charging as. Hopefully Tesla's marketing practices won't be adopted as norms by other companies for the EV industry."

Why so many of us fear the loss of "Net Neutrality"
Gordon
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/24/19 07:36 AM

Hi Hunter,

"As a hot rod/fun car, that becomes a different calculation..." exactly. My interest with an EV conversion begins and ends with the enticement of improved performance.

About public charging and what that may cost, I'd aim for a home charging station, and do my best not to use public charging.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 05/24/19 10:16 PM

Hi Folks,

The improved performance comment deserves some amplification. I've already spoken about the benefits of moving an MCSS' COM rearwardly and downwardly. The stock COM is much too far forward, and much too high. I've already spoken about the relative simplicity of the drivetrain versus that of an ICE.

What I haven't said much about is how with an ICE, as we increase motor output, we seem to enter a non-linear realm for the need for improved components connected to the motor, such as the transmission and cooling system. For me, the riskiest aspect is the transmission, because we're mostly at the mercy of the vendor to give us reliability claims that are meaningful. I've had four transmission failures, for example, working behind a motor that had less than half the output claimed by the vendor as being supportable by the transmission. I'm reminded of the urban legend claim of a car stereo amplifier's output as 10,000 Watts ISBL. ("ISBL" = If Struck By Lightning. If not struck by lightning, 10 Watts. That was actually told to me by an amplifier engineer, and not entirely in jest.) Things are simpler with a manual transmission, but I prefer automatic. Automatic transmissions that can handle massive TQ and HP are big, heavy, and expensive. A 200-4R can only be pushed so far. For the aftermarket enthusiast like myself, this represents a huge element of risk.

And the noise. I've never heard a motor in a hotrod with more than roughly 400hp output that was anything other than raucous. I remember a cross-country trip I made once with a 500hp SBC I built. I endured it only by using earplugs. (From the OEM it's still possible to be quiet, but the exhaust system needs to be big and heavy to make that happen.) To me, noise is noise, whether it comes from a motor or from a jackhammer. (In all fairness my main background is in acoustics.) I love the relative silence of an electric drivetrain, and the ability to mash the accelerator without waking-up half the county.

So there you have it. Once we go north of very, very roughly 500 hp, with an ICE, we enter lots of unknowns that can rise unexpectedly to cause parts failures and give us a big pain in the wallet. Not so with an EV conversion, where the relationship between motor ancillaries and motor output is simpler and more linear. Why, specifically, do I complain about nonlinearity with an ICE? Because with an ICE, as we increase motor output, we tend to reduce its efficiency under a part-throttle condition, so wasted heat increases disproportionately. Thus, we invite cooling system issues, as Mark Stielow has seen time and again with the Camaros he's built. Then, we have transmission issues where instead of engineering new transmissions from scratch as the OEM can do, we take off-the-shelf designs and try to use stronger materials with higher fluid pressure to improve robustness. But this method can only go so far, and that so far seems to be not far enough with many recent hotrod motors. Plus, the improvements tend to increase the power wasted by the transmission in the form of, once again, heat. (Again, please remember that I'm speaking from the perspective of an automatic transmission mainly.) I like the prospect of assigning all shifting duties in an electric drivetrain either to no transmission at all, or maybe one, or two at the most, GV overdrive units. Or similar, at least in theory. There's more to be said, such as concerning fuel economy, but these are the top points. Again, with an ICE, I say price and risk increase disproportionately to motor output, while with an electric drivetrain, we stay more linear. My guess is that the "sweet point" of the curve where cost in relation to performance (where performance includes handling) with an electric drivetrain overtakes an ICE, is somewhere above several hundred HP.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 07/19/19 09:02 PM

Greetings,

I thought it would be interesting to post here that the introduction of the new mid-engine Corvette C8 a few days ago in Orange County punctuates a talking point brought up frequently in this thread: namely, the benefits of moving the COM rearwardly (and with electric, additionally, downwardly.) I think for this reason and many more, it's only a question of when, not if, EV conversions are seen as an upward performance move for hotrods.

The MCSS is especially auspicious for this kind of conversion because of its huge trunk, and because of the terrible COM location engineered by the factory.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/11/19 10:03 PM

Hi Folks,

Ford showed a "Mustang Lithium" concept car at SEMA in LV. 900hp, and most likely 10s or possibly faster. For a whole bunch of reasons grounded in physics and already enumerated in this thread, my next A/G body drivetrain (assuming I'm fortunate enough to get back in this hobby,) will be electric and not an ICE. On paper, at least, the advantage of electric is simply too big to ignore, and especially for a front-heavy platform like the A/G body. Apparently an increasing number of OEMs are shifting toward electric, with Porsche and now Ford falling in this new line.

https://electrek.co/2019/11/05/ford-all-electric-900hp-mustang-lithium-at-sema/

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/12/19 11:22 PM

Small addition to the previous post: it's revealing that years ago, the initial OEM shift toward EV was because of fuel/energy considerations. But lately, the emphasis seems to be performance. So the OEM is coming on board for the same reasons as those reading here, presumably. Probably can't get a stronger endorsement than that that we're barking up the right tree.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: PB86SS/87LS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/13/19 02:30 PM

I saw this the other day too, just goes along that the manufacturers, or GM at least, are on board/pushing the envelope for the performance aspect on this: https://www.motor1.com/news/380420/chevrolet-e-10-concept-sema/

Maybe this will lead to an increase in value/popularity of station wagons and even more so if possible on trucks which seem to be red hot already, as vehicles naturally setup for room/place to put these batteries.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/14/19 09:45 PM

Great link - thanks, PB! This section got my attention:

"Much more important changes have happened underneath the hood. Gone is the original 4.6-liter V8 engine and in place is Chevy’s electric Connect & Cruise concept crate propulsion package offering 'approximately 450 horsepower.' Using 'proven components from the Chevrolet Bolt EV,' the system features double-stack electric crate motors, two Bolt-sourced 400-volt batteries, and a conventional automatic transmission.

'General Motors has the in-house talent required to create a concept like the E-10,' Jim Campbell, vice president of Performance and Motorsports at Chevy, commented. 'With the innovative thinking and expertise our performance team, electrification team and many others at GM bring, this project went from concept to a running vehicle in 18 weeks to demonstrate what the future of an eCrate propulsion system and hot rodding could look like.' [Italics mine.]

The power from the electric propulsion system is channeled exclusively to the rear wheels and provides 0 to 60 miles per hour (0 to 96 kilometers per hour) sprint in around five seconds. The estimated quarter-mile time is in the high 13-second range."

So GM is working on an eCrate propulsion system. I just hope they use a higher voltage and give us something like 800hp. The performance they got from that truck seemed a bit disappointing for 450hp, but maybe the truck is very heavy (lots of battery energy?) I assume this is an AC system, incidentally; but no matter, this is still great news!

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/14/19 09:55 PM

Maybe they were reading our discussion on Page 2 of this thread... Hmm... confused Will we get any kind of royalties for having the idea first?
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/14/19 11:03 PM

Hi Hunter, no, but I second that idea! I sent a message through Linkedin to the person cited in the article, asking for 800hp. I also sent him a link to this thread. Here's hoping!

The nice thing is that the batteries and motor in their eCrate package are connected through wires, so we should have high flexibility of placement, unlike a mechanical system. But, if their system works through a transmission, then dollars-to-donuts the motor/tranny sits in the same spot as the original ICE motor/tranny. It probably also conserves the rest of the drivetrain. This simplicity certainly favors the home installer, if not the car's best performance, as was discussed earlier in this thread. Even so, that still means we could put all the batteries in the rear half of the car, which would permit a big mass-distribution improvement over the awful OE configuration. Again, the more traction we want to get to the ground assuming a single pair of driven wheels, the more weight we want sitting on the rear axle.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/17/19 03:49 AM

Another follow-up: just need to qualify that last statement. It isn't open-ended; too much rearward bias can be bad too. Imagine, for example, 100% of the car's weight on the rear wheels. The slightest forward acceleration would cause a wheelstand. What I really mean is that with maximum forward acceleration, there is sufficient rearward weight bias so that the front wheels would become mostly, but not completely, unloaded (with complete unloading, directional control would be lost.)

But that still leaves plenty of room to increase the weight on the rear wheels compared to the dismal A/G body original design with a 57/43% static weight distribution. If, for example, our target is 1g maximum forward acceleration (0-60mph in 2.75 sec,) and with a COM height target of, say, 19", then we could still keep the front wheels on the ground with as much as 82% of the car's static weight on the rear axle. For various reasons, I think 40/60% would work well overall.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/18/19 02:13 PM

I read this yesterday and thought it would be appropriate to add to the discussion here:

https://jalopnik.com/what-is-the-electric-version-of-the-ls-swap-1839791140

The short version is that Tesla Model 3 drivetrain and Chevy Volt battery packs seem to be the current sweet spot of adaptability, availability, and usability for electric swaps. Not sure if there's clearance under a Monte without modification, but I imagine it would not be too difficult to make it happen.
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/19/19 02:15 AM

I don't know about finding used EV batteries in junkyards in the future. Those lithium batteries are ultra toxic, much more so than lead acid batteries. I would think the EPA will mandate that junked EV batteries be properly disposed off right away. Not let to sit around a yard where it could leak toxic chemicals or electrocute unsuspecting people. Junkyards probably would not want to keep them around either since they are a fire hazard and can combust weeks after an accident. Plus most yards do not treat the junked cars with kid gloves, I would not want to think what would happen when the typical careless junkyard worker driving a forklift accidentally pierces a lithium battery under the car. I don't know about GM's Volt, but I do know Tesla's systems are full of DRM software.

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/19/19 03:41 AM

Hi Hunter,

Great article! I like that it's written by a seasoned professional who isn't trying to sell performance parts, so he comes across as honest. Sounds like he might make a great consultant if he'd be open to that option.

I'm guessing that fitting that Tesla assembly under a Monte would indeed require major surgery, similar in concept, at least, to transplanting an (extra, extra big) Corvette rear. I'm envisioning moving the rear-seat floorboard upward as well to fit batteries unless all those batteries could fit where the gas tank currently goes, or maybe the gas tank area plus the area right underneath the rear seat cushion, where we like to put our mufflers. Since the A/G body already needs major surgery IMO just to get the chassis to be reasonably rigid, I don't see additional surgery to get an electric drivetrain to package correctly as a significant further barrier. If one can machine and weld - even better also do bodywork - then there's virtually no modification that's ultimately off the table. (I can dream, can't I?!) But I'm not kidding myself here: this would be one monster project. (Marcus, if you're somewhere out there reading, this would be a great point for you to jump in! I know you're thinking electric too!). Maybe that's why GM will probably go KISS with their eCrate offering.

About batteries: there are few areas of current automotive OEM activity seeing more intense R&D than battery technology. More energy per unit mass, per unit volume, and no doubt per unit cost, are top targets currently garnering billions of dollars of investment. I'm quite sure that we'll see big advances within the next several years. That's another reason why I'd target a short driving range. As I've said before, absent a breakthrough in some other realm of energy transduction, a massive shift to electric is not an if, but a when proposition.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: zelm86ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/19/19 01:31 PM

I changed a battery in a hybrid Escape and our parts department can't find anyone to take it without paying a lot of money. It still sits in the back of the parts department after at least two years. This is a 330 volt battery and I agree with Buick Runner. There's a real danger to the salvage yards and the customers taking the cars apart to "pick a part" .
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/19/19 09:52 PM

They are already in yards around the country, and functional used batteries are all over the resale market. Damaged/end of life batteries are definitely an issue, but a really good chunk of the ones out there now are ready to be re-purposed and reused other places.
I'm not sure if the entire Volt pack would be used in it's full "T" shaped configuration, but it might work in the existing transmission tunnel and under the rear seat, or possibly turned around with the majority in the trans tunnel and the cross part under hood, directly in front of the firewall. If the pack can be disassembled and used on cells, that should make it easier to place cells wherever needed for function, balance, and fit.
https://greentecauto.com/hybrid-bat...yUr0j-8kP-LQWPVcNyS0vSxjztRoCWTsQAvD_BwE
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/20/19 12:53 AM

Working with high voltages obviously doesn't inhibit the OEM, and with the proper precautions, it shouldn't inhibit us either. I would argue that it isn't especially hard to learn this discipline and to be diligent about applying it: a quick search under "high voltage courses" comes back from Google with hundreds of online offerings. Furthermore, if high battery voltages were so unmanageable, then GM wouldn't be developing an eCrate package: just think of the field day for lawyers litigating electrocutions! I would venture based on my engineering background that no company in their right mind would sell such a product unless the probability of injury were well under 1ppm, based on a DFMEA mindset.

For disconnected HV batteries/capacitors, a slow forced discharge through a large resistance may be essential. Just check terminal voltage. All batteries and capacitors have a non-infinite equivalent shunt resistance that ensures that in the absence of a connection, the plates will eventually discharge. (The higher the capacitance, the lower this shunt resistance, so the smaller the time constant of discharge.)

I'm not trying to be dismissive of HV concerns, but just like fire, when treated correctly, it can be a good thing. Nevertheless if anyone here feels uncomfortable with it, then just desist. Or if you are ignorant of the topic, then at least get educated about it. But for this reason, however, I'm not going to sidetrack this thread into an Edison vs. Westinghouse/Tesla showdown about high voltages. Fair enough? We've been around this block several times already.

Thanks,
MAP
Posted By: mmc427ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/20/19 06:43 AM

Don't forget you need a few special tools when playing with these HV cars.

https://service.teslamotors.com/sit...lectrial_Safety_Hook_Requirements_R1.pdf

I work on some of these new fangled washing machines that run high voltage inverters for the DC motors in them. Gotta be smarter these days.
Bob
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/20/19 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by mmc427ss
Don't forget you need a few special tools when playing with these HV cars.

https://service.teslamotors.com/sit...lectrial_Safety_Hook_Requirements_R1.pdf

I work on some of these new fangled washing machines that run high voltage inverters for the DC motors in them. Gotta be smarter these days.
Bob


Agreed. Many gearheads and hotrodders are pretty used to just going roughshode at their cars with very little to no knowledge of science, physics, or legality. Those days are nearly over, and people will need extensive education to work on the powertrains of the future. Hell, programing and coding will be more important to work on future cars than knowing how to take a physical machine apart and back together.

I don't mean to derail this highly interesting thread, but I do have concerns with EVs from researching information about them. Good salesmen must be open to customer concerns. That way they can discover unmet customer needs, address those needs, and improve the selling offer. In other words, complaints are valuable intel for improving products and services. There are reasons why electric cars have been tried off and on for 100 years now.

If the main goal for an EV conversion is for a race track car, then why bother with an onboard battery at all? Race tracks could be electrified which would greatly reduce weight. Of course that would mean such cars would to be hauled there, but that is generally done with track cars already. Perhaps this may be done to roads as well. Base models with no onboard power source that can only travel on electrified roads. More expensive EVs could have batteries or powercells to travel outside of power grids.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/20/19 07:40 PM

Hi Folks,

Good contributions! Bob, the "grounding hook" seems a bit original in terms of shape, but otherwise what's shown is very standard fare for HV stuff. Buick and Bob bring up good points that all reading here should heed: if you're going to go EV, you'll be dealing with high voltages, so educate yourself on how to do this safely. Just to be clear, I would share here exactly what I tell myself: you do this at your own risk. I cannot, and will not, be held liable for any ill effects of applying the ideas in this thread.

Electrification of roads: the biggest challenge is how to transmit the electrical power from the grid to the car. You either need some kind of bulky sliding contact (think electrified trolley cars with overhead cables,) or you need to do it by Faraday's law of induction, which is how smartphones and such are recharged without attaching cables. Problem is, the enormous E and B fields required would be sources of E-M radiation to the outside world, and dangerous to people and ferromagnetic materials that would happen to be nearby. Example: if you want 500 hp of motor power, then you probably need at least 1MW of E-M power transmission, which is triple the power of the nation's most powerful FM station. (If Tesla were alive today, he'd say "No problem"!)

As a compromise solution, you'd probably keep a smallish battery in the vehicle to provide short-term bursts of power to the motor as needed, and use road electrification to provide low-power, long-term (20hp?) charging for that battery. Problem is the road system: it will probably take decades of time and many billions of dollars before this becomes widespread.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: mmc427ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/20/19 09:23 PM

Back when I was a kid living in Pittsburgh we rode the trolleys, street car everywhere. Well almost everywhere, you were at the mercy of the tracks and the overhead power supply. You did a lot of walking to get to the tracks.
With the infrastructure being in a state of disrepair that it is, especially here in the Rustbelt NE can't see anytime in the future that we'll be running slot cars on the street.

Couple problem I see with charging EV. In the inner city people live in very narrow properties. Their cars are wider than their homes, they park blocks away sometimes and carry groceries to the abode. Charging your EV in front of your house just won't happen.
And if everyone is driving EVs does that mean every place will have charging stations for free like it is in some schools, offices now. Don't think so, there will be a fee. Another point is i believe EVs are just a temporary thing, fusion is the future, Back to the Future.

Ev's are rage now, and I get it. Would like to own a Tesla P and stop dumping loads of money into a lousy mpg van.
Bob
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/21/19 08:01 PM

Hi Bob,

Yes, about the infrastructure, I'm hardly holding my breath. If Elon Musk can't make it happen, then our odds of succeeding as a tiny hot-rodding community is zero. Tesla would have used direct E-M radiation to transmit energy, but this was in the days long before radio/TV/internet/microwave and pacemakers. Morse code and telegraph were about the extent of E-M usage back then. Fusion is the future? It would have to be the cold variety, and most physicists today agree that can't happen. A few decades back someone got the Nobel prize for theorizing it, but one of our physicists, upon carefully reviewing his calculations, found a critical error.

So, for now, it's EV, and the car carries all the energy it needs.

Back to the immediate topic: about EV safety: it will be most interesting to see the compromises GM makes to create an e-Crate package. Obviously they won't require customers to get training before installing/using it; that would be too big a hassle for a product they hope to turn a profit from. So we can deduce that the package will be maximally sealed and plug-and-play.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/24/19 02:37 AM

Folks!

I don't know why I didn't put two and two together before, but the news of the 9-sec eCOPO Camaro a few months back probably has everything to do with the eCrate package supposedly in the works from GM performance. After all, if they can put a 700hp electric drivetrain in a Camaro, then why not an MCSS? As I've said before, electric drivetrains offer greater connective flexibility than ICE-based drivetrains, so there's a high probability that such a drivetrain could be adapted to many different chassis.

https://electrek.co/2018/10/29/chev...conversion-running-a-9-sec-quarter-mile/

Some of this is so noteworthy that I think a section from this article is worth quoting here:

Quote
This wasn’t a 100% professional effort…

"Chevrolet partnered with Hancock and Lane Racing not only for the team’s success in NHRA drag racing, but its involvement with Patrick McCue, the driving force behind the record-holding “Shock and Awe” electric drag racing car, and his Seattle-area Bothell High School automotive technology program. More than a dozen students participated in the development and assembly of the electrified drag car, with the racing team’s assistance."

How do you get to 800 Volts when the Chevy Bolt/Volt and even Tesla is working with 400 Volt designs?

"The electric motor is based on a pair of BorgWarner HVH 250-150 motor assemblies, each generating 300 lb.-ft. of torque, and replaces the gas engine. It is connected to a conventional, racing-prepared “Turbo 400” automatic transmission, which channels the motor’s torque to the same solid rear axle used in the production COPO Camaro race cars."

More importantly and interestingly for me, the 800V allows for faster charging times like we’ve seen with the Porsche Taycan. At the track being able to recharge is even more important than normal on the road use however, GM hinted it might incorporate some of this technology in its future EVs – which would be welcomed.


It looks like our guesses were almost certainly correct: electric motor(s) in the front, then a stout THM400 transmission sans torque converter (my guess is that they would bolt into our chassis in the very same three locations that the current motor/tranny assembly does,) then a stout driveshaft, then a stout rear just as we might use for any other stout motor: ICE, EV, or otherwise. The center of mass of this assembly is farther forward than I would like, but I would maximally compensate by locating the battery pack as far rearward as possible. Another option might be to use two Gear Vendors overdrive units in series as the transmission, connected to a short propeller shaft in the back using two CV joints. The nice thing about the GV units is that are diametrically compact, so they could fit farther rearward in the driveshaft tunnel.

Exciting to say the least!

Best,
MAP

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/24/19 09:00 PM

Links concerning the HVH 250 series of electric motor cited in the article:

https://www.borgwarner.com/technologies/electric-drive-motors/hvh-series-electric-motor

https://evwest.com/support/remy250.pdf

From these it's not clear whether the OEM is Remy or Borg Warner, but either one is thoroughly proven. The Remy version, dating from the days of Delco-Remy, might explain why GM chose this brand for the eCOPO Camaro. Hint!

Quick comments:

1. The motors are stackable in series = flexibiilty of torque and power. If the eCOPO Camaro stacked two, there's no reason why three couldn't be stacked, for instance.
2. The motors have an OD of roughly 20", so they'll have to go either in the engine bay or in the trunk. Sigh.
3. The large motor OD comes with a short length, thankfully. Each motor is only 7.1" long.
4. Each motor weighs about 95 lb, so a big-block worth of weight would correspond to about 7 of these electric motors, in which case we'd be looking at about 2,400hp and 2,100lb-ft of torque. Who said EVs are just for the environment?(!!)
5. The motors require cooling, despite the fact that each one runs at a maximum efficiency of about 95%. Comparing WOT figures, a typical hotrod motor runs at about 25-30% efficiency. So 700hp at the crank means about 1,800hp of thermal power is lost to the atmosphere. If we assume our electric motors run at about 90% average efficiency, then 700hp would mean about 80hp of thermal power loss, or about 4% of our hypothetical big block. By comparison it's easy to see that the cooling system for our EV conversion would be quite modest relative to our big-block. In fact, it would be modest even compared to that needed for a low-output 4-cylinder economy ICE motor.

Speaking of that second link above, "EVwest" has been turning up a lot in recent EV news. I have zero knowledge of them, but their website contains a trove of interesting materials:

https://www.evwest.com/catalog/index.php

Enjoy,
MAP

PS: Can you see why I have every intention that my next hotrod project be electric?
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/25/19 07:07 AM

I would not be surprised if GM sells its electric motor coversion crates with an install service. That they may only ship them to authorized installers, not to consumers for DIY installs. Plus it would allow GM to increase profit margins besides covering liability concerns.

The greater power and torque of electric motors will pose a issue with older car conversions. Most cars are not built with unlimited capacity to withsand stress from high HP and torque. A stock G body in mint condition with all the factory bracing can only take 400 hp.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/25/19 08:01 AM

I agree about the need to strengthen/stiffen our A/G bodies, and that's true even with a low-output motor. Something approaching four figures of TQ and HP in British units, no matter the nature of the prime mover, will require careful engineering. Most of what I've written about converting the A/G body to a unibody platform to improve handling and NVH would have the main effect of increasing its torsional rigidity about its longitudinal axis, which is the very thing needed for a high-output motor as well.

Hopefully, GM will offer scalable packages (motors mechanically in series, battery packs electrically in parallel) so output and driving range can be scaled as desired.
Posted By: Witness86SS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/25/19 03:19 PM

I've never wanted a truck and I've never wanted a tesla, but I really do want a Tesla Cybertruck. It's like a space el camino that seats 5 and does 0-60 in 3 seconds.

As an 80's kid this was the car of the future.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/26/19 03:46 AM

Hi Witness,

That's 0-60 in 2.9 seconds (top-of-the-line triple-motor version) in a truck that weighs 6,000 lb. If we made no other changes but reduced weight to about 3,500 lb, and assuming we could maintain traction (which we probably couldn't without slicks,) then 2.9 seconds would become 2.21 seconds. I know people will say, "You can't get an MCSS with a battery pack down to 3,500lb." And I would say, "Sure you can; just make the battery pack small." And the rejoinder would be, "Then range would be unduly restricted." But "unduly" is in the eye of the beholder. I would keep range short since I wouldn't take this car on any long trips, plus battery technology is evolving so rapidly that I wouldn't want to sink a heavy investment (pun intended) into a big battery pack with today's technology.

To put 0-60 in 2.21 sec (theoretically) in further perspective, assuming constant acceleration, that would be a launch of 1.24g and 60mph would come at the end of 97 feet. 60 ft would pass in 1.74 sec. I for one wouldn't complain.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/27/19 06:00 PM

Hi Folks,

OK, I can't resist this. It's one thing to talk about theory endlessly; it's another to actually see the theory in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7UhFqIOUgA

"Tesla Cybertruck pulls Ford F150 uphill"

Best,
MAP

PS: My opinion only: that cybertruck has to be one of the deliberately ugliest pieces of rolling hardware ever envisioned. And I thought NIssan had that market cornered.

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 11/28/19 11:43 PM

About that last video: a contest of pulling power has been used over centuries, even over millennia, to demonstrate superiority of thrust of the new over the old. I wonder whether the Tesla folk are fully cognizant of this. I'm thinking back to 1848/49, for example, when ship propulsion by propeller versus by paddlewheel was contested in exactly the same way: two vessels, two different methods of propulsion, same steam engines developing 400hp each, connected stern-to-stern with a heavy mooring line between the two. And yes, the propeller won, the propeller-driven vessel besting the paddlewheeler by pulling the paddlewheeler astern at 2.8 knots in one account, and 1.46 knots in another.

https://collections.rmg.co.uk/mediaLib/3/198/167/py0944.jpg

Anyway! Back to EVs.
Posted By: Witness86SS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/04/19 09:31 PM

I thought the tug o war was BS, 4 wheel traction and superior weight distribution vs the unloaded RWD. A PR stunt.
Try it vs a 4WD with some weight over the wheels
Posted By: zelm86ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/05/19 01:32 PM

Ford had a reply to this. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/tesla-cybertruck-ford-f150-video-tug-of-war/
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/05/19 04:58 PM

Speaking as a physicist, of course, we can pick this apart with all kinds of qualifications. At the end of the day, we're still talking about the maximum tractive force that the drivetrain can deliver to the ground, and the Cybertruck wins. The video illustrates this powerfully and in a manner that's instantly relatable, unlike my talking here with all kinds of numbers and theory. So the message is fundamentally valid.

Let's not forget that the point here is not to talk-up Tesla or talk-down Ford; the point here is to show that EVs have evolved from the province of the tree-huggers to the realm of true performance, and they deserve attention for those wanting a better alternative to ICEs for our MCSSs.

Remember the name of the thread: "High nines from zero liters (0 CID)", not, "Lower carbon emissions from zero liters (0CID)".
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/05/19 04:59 PM

In the vid, you can see that the DMC 12, I mean the cyber truck has larger wheels than the F150, giving it a leverage advantage. Elon is a guy I don't trust.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/05/19 05:07 PM

Correction: larger wheels actually give the Cybertruck a disadvantage, not an advantage.

I think we're continuing to miss the point. Forget people. Forget marketing. Forget politics. This is about physics. Buick, you probably didn't have the time to read my last post, which hit only a minute after yours.
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/06/19 04:01 PM

The Tesla stunt was apples and oranges, but still illustrates the point. The Tesla can likely pull like a 3/4 ton diesel, run like a tuned GMC Syclone, and get MPG (equivalents) like... I dunno, a diesel Rabbit Pickup from the 80's? I'm running out of comparisons here... Any one of those might be able to put up a fight in one category, but the Tesla takes it in the other 2 easily.

Once we throw in looks, however, the scales may tip, but that is subjective so I'll leave out the fact that it looks like a Delorean/ElCamino love child designed in the 80's as the trucks we would be driving in 2020...

Brutal performance though, and more future junkyard parts I might play with one day.
Posted By: zelm86ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/06/19 05:22 PM

As far as going to a junk yard and pulling all the parts to make a conversion work that's going to be a lot harder then most people think. I'm not saying it can't be done,but there's a lot of modules that need to "talk" to each other (and with no faults) to even get the thing to power up let alone drive. For just a example, a Focus Electric has 24 modules on two hs-can,1 ms-can and one I-can networks. Now a electric conversion kit from GM is going to be a lot more user friendly as far as installing it in a car like ours. When you drive a electric or hybrid car (that's running on the electric side) and step on the pedal, you can really feel the power in the seat of your pants. Installing a conversion kit from GM in a Monte SS would be really cool. I guess what I'm saying is taking parts from a donor and making it work is going to be a lot harder than a LS swap. You would have to grab more that just the battery pack and traction motor at least until someone writes the software to over ride the factory to make it a more "stand alone" system.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/06/19 06:42 PM

I think Zelm86ss makes a solid point. In my once-in-a-while reading over at diyelectricar.com, I see hobbyists posting all the time about, "How do I make component X talk with component Y?" all the time. Or, "I got this great assembly out of a wrecked (something), but I can't get it to work because of (something). Any pointers?" But if we can strip assemblies down to bare batteries and bare motors, assuming such a thing can be done, and build back up from there in a cost-effective manner, then that may present a path forward.

I agree a kit from GM would have to be much more user-friendly, but it may have modest power output so that buyers don't wind up twisting their cars into pretzels due to the prodigious torque. I only hope that GM makes their e-crate packages scalable in some way, so those that want 800hp can get it. What's quite clear with the information I have is that 800hp in an electric motor is probably going to be faster than 800hp from an ICE if the car has the requisite traction, because peak torque in an electric motor is at 0 rpm (hence no torque converter.)

The great thing I see about electric is how high output converges with great road-handling and with great economy, as you (2/3) said, Hunter: assuming just a single axle is driven, then make that the rear, and concentrate the car's weight there too. With an ICE, this approach is impossible because more output, which generally means more weight, has to go on the wrong end of the car.

Best,
MAP

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/06/19 08:06 PM

Hi Folks,

I saw this surprising statement by Mark Reuss (president of GM) yesterday:

"We believe in an all-electric future with safer, cleaner and easier transportation. With the advancements in EV, there is no doubt we are on the cusp of an auto revolution. Read more from our President, Mark Reuss, as he breaks down the barriers to making electric cars mainstream: s.gm.com/m8bjy"

Mr. Reuss goes on to say that he expects EVs will achieve parity with ICE vehicles within a decade, and that evolving battery technology and the availability of public charging stations will be key.

Why do I share this link here? Because we, just like the OEMs, want low battery cost, volume, and weight in relation to stored energy. The worldwide R&D investment in battery technology is truly staggering: many billions of dollars per year, so I believe the needle will shift rapidly in favor of electric as time passes. (I'm honestly pleased to be hearing about GM offering an e-crate package in the near future. I thought it was still a number of years away.)

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/06/19 11:09 PM

30 years ago, EFI swaps had parts available in the junkyard, but not many people made the swap because of the lack of computer and wiring understanding, and concerns over high pressure fuel systems.
20 years ago, not many people could pull off an LS swap because the wiring and ECU control was still too complicated and expensive, and it was reserved for magazines and people with "too much money".
10 years ago, no one did VVT/DOD motors or Drive by Wire swaps into older cars, because there weren't cams that would work with it and/or a lack of understanding about it.
2 years ago, no one tried a Direct Injection swap themselves, only some of the big boys.
LS1tech had tons of threads asking how to make a green/blue PCM work in a 98 Trans Am, and all kinds of other similar questions, with long threads discussing the intricacies of the factory parts and internal limitations.

But now those same questions simply get a "READ THE STICKY, NEWB!!!!"
You can do an LS swap for $2000, VVT is a minor added cost, DBW is completely normal, and its still kind of expensive for a direct injection swap, but doable for the average gearhead. I see no reason it won't follow a similar trajectory for electrics.

I predict in 5 years, you will be able to swap a Tesla drive unit into an older car with a random battery pack for less than $5000, and in 10 years, I think we'll read this thread and laugh at the challenges we thought we'd have.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/07/19 12:17 AM

Hi Hunter,

No doubt you're right, although I think the timeframe estimate may be a bit optimistic. Like any new technology (at least new to us,) it will take time to get past the learning curve, but it will most assuredly come. Here's hoping it comes sooner than later!

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Buick Runner

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/07/19 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by MAP
Correction: larger wheels actually give the Cybertruck a disadvantage, not an advantage.

I think we're continuing to miss the point. Forget people. Forget marketing. Forget politics. This is about physics. Buick, you probably didn't have the time to read my last post, which hit only a minute after yours.


You are right, I was thinking of the drive wheels as bull gears rather than pinions. Still larger wheels provide more traction, especially with Ag style lugs on non paved surfaces.

With electro motive power, the issue isn't power output, its input. Railroads have used electric drive locomotives for 100 years. However they use either power pickups or onboard diesel powerplants.

As for not trusting Elon, he has pointed out that his endgoal is to outlaw all manually driven cars as he considers them death machines. That his dream is that everyone rides in electric self driving car ride shares.

Not sure about other EVs, but Teslas are loaded with digital rights media (DRM) that protects their software from being tinkered with by outside parties. It would take a group of well trained hackers to unlock the operating software. Also Tesla systems are linked to the internet so the company can monitor their cars, collect data, and update the software. They can even remotely shut down their cars or modify things. For example, they can remotely extend or restrict your range depending on how much you pay. It is very much a Big Brother situatiion with Teslas and hopefully the other car makers do not follow this path with their EVs. If GM's E package comes with Big Brother monitoring, I would for sure not purchase it. Using junked EV powertrains will probably require air gapping them so they can't be remotely shut down by OEMs for non aproved use, if it can be done. Not to mention what kind of legal issues that might be entailed.

Networks are an issue too. The owner's manual for my CVPI warns Police upfitters to not splice into the factory harnesses as it would cause network issues with the various modules. Instead, CVPIs come with extra power leads for add on Police equipment to avoid network problems. Panthers are dinos compared to the even more complex modern automotive networks.

Over on Gbodyforum, there is a similar topic to this. One poster states he owns a Asian EV with aircooled batteries, and remarks that they are a weak link in an otherwise well made car. He states that aircool batteries are known for having much shorter service lives and higher premature failure rates than liquid cooled batteries.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/07/19 10:09 PM

Hi Buick,

Thanks for those interesting inputs, Buick. But my advice to you and everyone reading here is to focus just on the physics of the matter, and forget the personalities involved. If we can get junked assemblies and separate components down to the absolute essentials, such as batteries and motors (and when I say batteries, I mean that we can connect directly to the anode and cathode,) then we ought to be able to build-up from there and bypass all of these issues. After all, the batteries and motors are the most expensive and significant components of the system.

Here's proof such a thing is possible: EV West is selling used Tesla battery packs. Here is their offering for the Tesla 18650 pack:

https://www.evwest.com/catalog/prod...63&osCsid=eobcea7q6d87gejd9ss4m94ip4

What's very clear, however, is the need for various safeguards to ensure bad things like fires don't happen. That's why I think that the aftermarket jump from ICE to EV will happen more slowly than the jump from the early SBC motors to the LS motors: we have to switch from mostly the mechanical realm to the electrical realm. The electrical realm is less intuitive than the mechanical, so it's more abstract.

My inclination would be to work with a very solid EV vendor with proven technical chops (EV West seems to be such a vendor but I have little data at this point,) that can be trusted to guide me to a good, safe solution at a fair price. A GM e-crate package seems like another good route, but I'm guessing they'll start conservatively, meaning less power than I'd like. The best compromise IMO would be a modular one, but I don't know whether GM would trust the installer to not do something foolish.

Best,
MAP

Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/10/19 08:48 PM

Hi Folks,

Just read this GM announcement

It's becoming increasingly hard to ignore that GM is saying repeatedly that they are aiming for a "100% EV future." "Zero emissions," of course, is patently false since when one considers the entire energy chain, the source is still transducing chemical energy into electrical energy (most likely with natural gas-combusted turbo-generators,) and in so doing certainly emitting hydrocarbon byproducts. Admittedly, however, this is still much cleaner than ICEs typically achieve.

Take-away for us: the worldwide pressure to improve battery performance is enormous. R&D in this field is prodigious: certainly in the realm of many billions of dollars per year. (I can't put my finger on a total global figure, but GM's single investment of 2.3e9$ with LG for a battery plant is revealing. Panasonic supplies Tesla.)

I believe this will result in rapid improvements in the ratio of energy stored to cost/volume/mass. Such improvements would benefit us just as much as it would the OEM. For me this indicates that the short-term strategy is justified to minimize battery investment and sacrifice range as much as possible, with the great benefit of reduced mass.

Best,
MAP

PS: Just curious if anyone out there reading all this is seriously considering an EV conversion? If I had the resources, I'd be all over this like white on rice.
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/11/19 04:23 PM

I was gathering components for an EV conversion a while back, but more of an economy project. I've got an 85 S10 short bed regular cab base model truck. I also had access to a 30 hp VFD with DC bus input capability and 230V 3 phase output, and a 25hp 230 3 phase motor (scrap from my then-employer). I was hoping to get a 30 hp, but didn't get the chance.
The plan was to get a cheap battery bank (likely from electric forklifts) mounted in the bed, and place the motor and drive underhood mounted to the existing 4 speed, and swap some taller gears in the axle. Running through the manual transmission would overcome some of the low power aspects of a 30hp motor, and taller gears would allow for ~75 mph top speed (which matched the original 4 cylinder smirk ). I was hoping to put it together for maybe $1500 and make commuting costs go way down.
Then I changed jobs, left that equipment at the old place, and haven't had time to mess with thinking about it again.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/11/19 09:03 PM

Hi Hunter,

Your reply highlights a key defect in an EV conversion geared toward performance that equals or betters an ICE: it's expensive, and despite strong trending in reduced battery cost per unit energy with the passage of time, it's likely to remain so for probably several years or possibly more.

The earliest adopters are therefore likely to be relatively wealthy and not afraid of exploring new frontiers. In this forum or any other public forum for that matter, this demographic is likely to be very sparsely populated.

But that will only improve with time...

Best,
MAP
Posted By: PB86SS/87LS

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/11/19 10:30 PM

It will be quite awhile before it's anywhere close to common or mainstream to do EV swaps for performance. It will come but it's all about price/availability and of course performance being worth the swap as it improves/gets cheaper. Those doing it now will be like Hunter79764, for mpg/cost reasons on a daily commuter and people comfortable in handling the "new" technology. Took LS swaps maybe 10 years, very roughly, to go from avant-garde to commonplace. So EV I'd suspect is at least 10 years out from that trend. Plus there will be more natural resistance, some people like the natural combustion engine and the fun sounds and rumble they can make as part of the appeal.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/12/19 08:09 PM

Hi PB,

Sounds right! I've mentioned that one of my friends from high school days is the chief valvetrain engineer at GM. He did the LS7 motor valvetrain, for example. I've communicated a bit about EVs with him, and he says they're great but he has the eye-watering, rich smell of partially-combusted hydrocarbons in his blood! (I know he loves big cams with big overlap triangles with a terrible quality of idle. He says the transmission folks require stable idles, so he has to tune that out. Emissions, too, sadly.)

As for me, I'd never do it on the basis of "fuel" cost alone. It would have to perform better than an ICE in a global sense (traction and handling) and do less than 3 sec to 60mph. 1/4-mile concerns me far less; that happens only rarely in daily driving (!)

I'll see how resources evolve for me.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: 86ttop

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/13/19 02:49 AM

This thread belongs in the Lounge!!
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/13/19 06:14 PM

Hi 86,

I've been wondering also if this thread had deviated too far from the original intent. I think I'll steer it back to top dead center: high nines (ok, "ish",) from an electric drvietrain.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/13/19 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by MAP
1/4-mile concerns me far less; that happens only rarely in daily driving (!)



Speak for yourself! I've got an on-ramp that is wide open every morning, and it isn't safe to try merging with highway traffic at anything less than 70 or so wink


I think the economy conversions have been around since the 90's, just in very small communities and typically not the folks or the builds that get into magazines. DIY Performance EV's can probably trace their history on a similar timeframe as the rise of Tesla, i.e. both going from a relatively rare duck to being a legitimate endeavor in the last 10 years. My guess is that pure economy conversions are probably going to continue to decline unless and until there is another massive, long lasting cost increase for gas/diesel, and the same for pure economy EV's from the major OEM's. Nissan is talking about moving away from the Leaf model and into high end EV's, GM is making more noise about a hybrid Corvette than they ever did about the Volt.

At today's rates, I can't justify trading my 2004 Yukon Denali that gets ~12 mpg on my daily commute to work for any other "normal" car that gets better mileage (I don't want to lose utility, and something new enough to keep the utility at a lower fuel cost won't pay off at 2.xx/gallon). When we were at $4/gallon, I was weighing the options between the EV S10, a LP or CNG conversion on an F150 I had, or buying a tiny hatch for commuting and could have justified any of them but chose to change jobs for a shorter commute instead. I'm guessing I'm not alone in that scenario.
But if/when an EV conversion can be done on a shoestring budget of ~$5k and have similar performance to a V8, coupled with $4/gallon gas for an extended run, I think the switch will flip and performance conversions (with a side benfit of relative economy) will start coming out of the woodwork.

GM's apparent strategy of stacking motors in an easily retrofittable package becomes a great option. You can buy the electric equivalent to the existing 290hp 350 crate motor, or the midlevel HT383, or the high end LS7 crate, and possibly upgrade the one you got at a later date while keeping your existing controller and/or battery. I really don't think it is that far on the horizon...
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/13/19 08:39 PM

Hi Hunter,

I like the sound of that. But I'm just fearful that GM will release a one-size-fits-all EV option. I'd hope they'd make their kit scalable in at least two different power levels, with the lower of the two being 450hp as mentioned here:

https://electrek.co/2019/11/05/gm-electric-pickup-hotrod-concept-bolt-ev/

They say this truck does 0-60 in 5 sec. Not bad, but hardly exciting. I don't know how much that truck weighs, but given that 0-60 time, I hope it's a lot(!)
BTW, 1/4-mile times: I agree the likeliest place to see that on the street is a highway on-ramp. But I also hope 70mph comes up faster than the end of that ramp(!)

Best,
MAP


Posted By: 86ttop

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/14/19 01:56 AM

MAP, since the thread really didn't pertain to the 4th generation Monte Carlo, it should have been in the Lounge from the beginning.
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/14/19 03:54 AM

Hi 86,

As the OP, I can say it has everything to do with the MCSS. I see you're a late joiner here - please read from the beginning: the MCSS has a terrible weight distribution from the factory, and an enormous trunk by modern standards. Both factors make this platform an ideal candidate for an EV conversion. And it certainly belongs in the "Engine" forum because we're talking first and foremost about a change of prime mover. "High nines" is also a calling card that works best in this forum.

Let me draw a parallel: talking about an EFI conversion could apply to hundreds of other old car models and has nothing to do inherently with a 4th-gen MCSS. And yet, that topic finds its home here too.

I certainly invite a verdict from the moderators (PB86?) because I'm not interested in speaking of housekeeping here, but as I see it, the "Engine" forum is this thread's rightful home.

Best,
MAP
Posted By: 86ttop

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/14/19 04:42 AM

Nope, not a late comer, not interested in something that isn't directly related to the 4th gen cars!!
Posted By: mmc427ss

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/14/19 04:44 AM

Ya know one of the funny things about this subject is if you asked a 100 car guy what's under the hood, 50 would say it's an engine, and 50 would say it's a motor.
We all know it ain't no motor, it's an engine. But, the times they are changin.
Bob
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/14/19 06:58 AM

Issue submitted to the moderators for resolution.
Posted By: Z65_Paul

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/15/19 07:10 AM

Wow.. I get to moderate? Let me see if I remember how to do this.

I see both points about relevance or the lack there-of. The thread has wandered here and there away from what it would take to make the conversion, to general EV industry and trends. Let's keep it on track related to what it would take to convert a Monte to electric. I view it in the same light as what it would take to do an LS swap etc, which is certainly fair game here. Any general EV industry trends and discussion should be taken to the Lounge. The seats there are comfy, and the drinks are cheap.

PC
Posted By: AkronAero

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/15/19 05:12 PM

Paul - thanks again for all you do. Carrying forward on that theme:

MAP - You give me hope that there are alternatives to our current/upgraded drive trains which could promise to keep our cars on the road in any eventuality! If I were closer to your Yuma address I'd swing by (yes with a stop at Lance's...) to scope out what it would take as we discussed. You know my car and that I have pitched the computer and have all Speedhut gauges. If one were to make the jump to electric, assuming that the parts had evolved and were installation ready, what controls and instrumentation would be needed today and what are your thoughts of where this might lead say 10 years down the road? I would not be enamoured with a single Tesla control screen in the middle of the dash with no other displays... hahaha). One would assume the batteries would come with their own dedicated cell management systems. You might want to get a business going on providing conversion packages...?

Gordon
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/15/19 08:22 PM

Hi Paul,

Thanks so much! Will gladly do all you say.

Hi Gordon,

That was a lot to fit inside a single post (!) I think it's going to take years to figure out where this is going to take us in 10 years - I just hope it's significantly less than 10 years wink A business: tantalizing for sure, but the starting point for me would be doing my own conversion on an MCSS, and if I did that, it wouldn't be only the EV conversion proper, but the whole vision I have for transforming an MCSS: unibody, suspension with IRS if possible, etc. Basically, I see the evolution of that as potentially touching just about every forum in this site.

Given Pual's direction, I expect my rate of posting here will drop to zero or thereabouts for quite a while, because I see myself as currently possessing about 1% of the knowledge base necessary to proceed with confidence on a conversion, where I'm defining 100% confidence as a simple ICE swap. Hopefully someone else here will beat me to the goal and we'll see interesting posts by that person. Or persons...

Best,
MAP


Posted By: 86ttop

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/16/19 01:55 AM

Thank You MAP and Paul. Best of luck to you MAP, hope your ideas gain some traction in the conversion world!!
Posted By: MAP

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/16/19 03:24 AM

Thx, 86!!
Posted By: Hunter79764

Re: High nine's from zero liters (0 CID) - 12/16/19 06:26 PM

Thanks all, I'll try to keep it directly on MC's as well.

On reusing gauges, for the potential GM style solution (a "Crate" that bolts to the existing transmission), your speedometer would stay exactly as is, but the tach might need a revisit depending on the motor type. You could probably have a controller set up to give a useful output for motor speed.
Not sure what Water Temp/Oil Pressure might be used for that would more or less match the function and readings that you would have on an ICE.
If you ran liquid cooled motor/battery, the temp gauge is easy but I'm not sure how common those are on retrofits.
Volt meter on the 12V circuit would still be useful to make sure the DC-DC converter is working (or alternator if you opt for that route).
Might be able to monitor battery charge level on the gas gauge for a quick indicator?
If you could rework the oil pressure gauge to show amperage, that would be neat (lower at idle, higher under load, so the trend sort of carries)
I'm not sure how much else you would really need to monitor. If I was GM, I'd incorporate those outputs into the controller to make it easier to plug and play into an older car. They might even have a battery or motor temp sensor that would be a direct correlation for the coolant temp gauge. The rest of the information would probably be accessed via laptop for exhaustive tuning and troubleshooting, same as an EFI setup now.
© 2020 MonteCarloSS.com Message Board