quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Let me ask this, is it safe to say that how much power the motor makes over the RPM range I can approximate how much power it will take to run them (roughly) if I convert it from nm to kw? Further, as I mentioned earlier the 40KW motor won't make 40KW until about 145 mph, according to my calculations, at 60 MPH the 40 KW motor would be making roughly 28 KW, I don't know how much that helps, or if my math is even right but I thought I'd add it. For now that would be all

It's difficult to talk about power when it comes to electric motors. It's not like a gas motor that has a redline and then it's at max power. True an electric motor is rated at it's max capacity, but if you give it more power, it will make more power.

I guess if you are planning to have direct drive, then you have a problem, because without gears you are going to need the max power right at zero RPM. DC motors are good at that, AC motors, not so much. So you motor has to be larger to deal with the acceleration loads and you are going to need a wide RPM band. I'm assuming your motors are AC then?

This is a very interesting engineering feat, but make no mistake it's not going to be easy.

quote Originally posted by jscott1: It's difficult to talk about power when it comes to electric motors. It's not like a gas motor that has a redline and then it's at max power. True an electric motor is rated at it's max capacity, but if you give it more power, it will make more power. I guess if you are planning to have direct drive, then you have a problem, because without gears you are going to need the max power right at zero RPM. DC motors are good at that, AC motors, not so much. So you motor has to be larger to deal with the acceleration loads and you are going to need a wide RPM band. I'm assuming your motors are AC then? This is a very interesting engineering feat, but make no mistake it's not going to be easy.

I'm pretty sure that the motors are DC but it doesn't not directly say on the site for the motors, it does say they make DC motors generically but not specifically about the "HPD" motors.

I'm thinking, that how they are doing it (or at least what I would do) is they have 4 motors that combined make 2200 ft lbs of torque, which should be more than plently to move a car around, especially since that 2200 is available from 0 RPM (they say the motors drop down to 600 NM EACH at redline, which is around 1900 ft lbs). anyway, I'd use as many motors as it took to get up to speed and then only use 1 or 2 to keep it moving (or whatever it takes to maintain speed).

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: I'm pretty sure that the motors are DC but it doesn't not directly say on the site for the motors, it does say they make DC motors generically but not specifically about the "HPD" motors.

DC motors make lots of torque...that's not going to be your problem...the problem is that DC motors need lots and lots of current, so your battery pack has to be capable of large current flow. Large currents equal heat which equals inefficiency. That's why advanced systems use high voltage ac motors.


DC motors have limited RPM range, so I don't know how well direct drive is going to work. I don't know of a single direct drive DC system.

And I don't know of a single regenerative controller for DC motors. One guy I know tried it and gave up because it never worked right. The problem is that the brushes have to be balanced to work in either direction making them less efficient in both directions.

You are going to need one heck of a motor controller, I have no idea how you would do that.

EDIT - I just read the spec sheet on these motors, they are DC, but apparently they have integrated motor controllers that do the regenerative braking. That is good, but you still need one heck of a battery system. I suppose eliminating the heavy unnecessaary parts might offset the losses and inefficiencies. And the super-capacitors are neccessary to recapture all of that energy.

This system shows promise.

[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 07-15-2007).]

Guys, this has been an interesting read thus far but it seems to have no clear beginning and no clear end to it. In order to achieve a result you must first clearly define the problem.

What we know so far is that someone has a Pontiac Fiero that they would like to convert to electric drive. Since we are talking about converting an existing design we must first characterize that design in its stock form. We need to determine exactly how much power (torque) it takes to get it to do the work we want it to do. For instance, how much power does it take to make the car maintain a constant rolling speed of say 65 mph? How much power will it take to accelerate it to that speed? How far do we expect it to go on a charge, or in the case of a hybrid system on a gallon of gas? To answer these three most important questions you need to obtain some specifications on the stock version of the car. You will need to know the CD (coefficient of drag) and the frontal area of the body as well as the density of air at the altitude and temperature where the vehicle will be driven. From this you can determine the atmospheric drag that it must overcome. You will also need to factor in the cars weight, the rolling resistance of the tires, and the mechanical losses inherent to the wheel bearings and the transmission. Once you have each of these (resistances) identified you can add them up to determine the total work to be done by the drive system. As complicated as what I’ve just described might seem it’s actually the simple part of this exercise. From here on it gets really complicated. I say that because now the juggling act begins. The first thing you are going to do is to start ripping out all of ICE components that you will no longer need. This is going to cause the car to loose weight thus throwing off your original calculations. As you begin to determine the battery type and its weight, the motor type and its weight as well as that of all of the ancillary components needed, you will have to constantly go back and adjust the original loss calculation.

I could go on and on here but its getting late and I have to get up at 4:20 AM. In closing I’ll just point you guys in the direction of the books and articles that I found enlightening on electric cars.

This is perhaps the ultimate book on the subject.
http://www.amazon.com/Elect...id=1184564208&sr=8-4

This is the first of a three-part article that was the source of my inputs above.
http://www.triplepundit.com...l-efficie-002461.php

I hope to be able to return to this thread tomorrow night. Otherwise it could be a few days.

Good night for now...

Marty

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: I have a lot more to say about some of the concepts that have been posted above. Things like using the iron duke to drive a generator. If you guys are interested let me know and I’ll rant further…

Doesn't sound so much like a rant...so please continue...

quote Originally posted by jscott1: Doesn't sound so much like a rant...so please continue...

Thanks...

One area that we can talk about is an engine driven generator. The iron duke came in two versions, one at 92 HP and one at 98 HP (if I recall correctly). If you convert HP to watts of electric power the engines become 68.6 KW and 73.1 KW respectively. This would be adequate to drive a 50 KW generator if such a generator could do the all of the work that I described in my first post. I believe that GM is using just that size of generator in their proposed Chevy Volt series hybrid project. But there is a hidden problem with using just any motor to drive the generator. As you mentioned earlier the best EV designs use AC motors. Just like the motor that blows the air through your furnace an AC EV motor wants to see power at a particular line frequency. In order for a motor driven generator to produce the correct frequency it must be spun at a specific rpm. If the ICE engine and the generator are directly coupled the engine might not be able to produce the required HP to support the load at that particular RPM. You might be able to get around this problem by placing a gear set in between the pair but now you have introduced further losses and complexity to the system. Also, since the engine must closely maintain a constant speed, you might want to redesign the engine’s breathing for more efficiency. The OEMs like to use specially designed diesel engines for this reason. I’m not sure but I think I remember reading that the engine that GM is using is only a 1.3 liter type. When operated in this way a diesel is about 30% more efficient. In terms of size and weight this makes the duke look like about a 2:1 overkill.

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: Thanks.... In terms of size and weight this makes the duke look like about a 2:1 overkill.

True, the reason I suggested the duke is because it's already there, and also, I would propose leaving it connected to the drive wheels since the electric motors are directly connected to the front wheels. That might introduce huge ineficiencies though, I haven't thought about it hard enough to know if it would even work or not.

quote Originally posted by jscott1: True, the reason I suggested the duke is because it's already there, and also, I would propose leaving it connected to the drive wheels since the electric motors are directly connected to the front wheels. That might introduce huge ineficiencies though, I haven't thought about it hard enough to know if it would even work or not.

Actually what you just described is a parallel hybrid. It’s a standard gas powered car in the rear and an EV in the front. But in order to determine the merits of this layout there are a few blanks that need to be filled in. How would you propose to power the electric motors? Would you attempt still to attach some sort of generator to the duke? Would you also plan to put some batteries somewhere onboard?

One sort of parallel hybrid that works sort of like the one that you suggest is the Saturn Vue green line. But its design is a bit more simplified. It uses a special dual mode alternator/motor that is belt driven/loaded. When the Vue launches of the line the device works like a motor that adds its torque to that of the gas engine. Actually for the first few miles an hour it actually propels the vehicle all by its self. Since it’s the launching of the vehicle that chews up so much energy the city mileage is measurably improved. In cruise mode the device reverts back to an alternator that charges the battery. Then finally in situations while in motion where the driver wants to accelerate to pass some one the system once again reverts back to electric boost mode. It’s very simplistic but clever at the same time.

Well, once again its bed time. My club meeting is tomorrow night so I'll have to visit back here again later this week.
Good evening sir!

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: YOU NEED TO READ THERE SETUP THAT IS ALREADY WORKING BEFORE YOU START TALKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes...electric system have been around for a very long time - all you have to do is look at any warehouse at the battery powered forklifts. Technology has come a LONG ways in the last couple years, most new lifts run on AC motors for vastly improved life span (ie: no brushes). All our new lift trucks with the AC drive have nearly doubled the run time of the older units ( we are now averaging around 11 hours+ of run time per charge). The new unit are using regenerative braking which probably accounts for the big increase - but the electronics have also changed big time and use the power more effectively.

We also have some smaller units that run the 2 motor setup - they run a much smaller motor, but there are 2 of them, plus it is a smaller lift truck so it does not need as big of motor.

I don't see why such a system could be incorporated for car use - the big limitation is the batttery weight. The ones that we run at work use 24v batteries that weight in at around 800 lbs. These batteries also take approx 8 hours to charge using a 600v charger - so power requirements are fairly steep at that end of the scale. But then these are industrial use and the motors/batteries have to move (plus operate the hydraulic system) around a 8000+ lbs lift turck + load.

Technology is there - how practical it is for the everyday person is an issue

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: Actually what you just described is a parallel hybrid. It’s a standard gas powered car in the rear and an EV in the front. But in order to determine the merits of this layout there are a few blanks that need to be filled in. How would you propose to power the electric motors? Would you attempt still to attach some sort of generator to the duke? Would you also plan to put some batteries somewhere onboard?

Yes, my system would be a parallel hybrid, but there are some challenges to that.

In another thread we debated home made hybrids

https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...070315-2-078542.html

and came up with the concept of a parallel hybrid that used a series of levers to control the loading from the electric to the gas motor, this was called the "Frankenstein" Fiero, although I'm sure you could build a controller to do it. The real challenge is that will all the Internal Combusion Engine components in the car, where would you mount the batteries?

It would be very tight, to find a place, and the electric motors would probably be limited to launching the vehicle, bue even that would improve citiy efficiency. Is it enough to offset the development costs? Probably not, but it might be fun to build and operate.

jscott1,
This stuff isn't for everyone. I drive an 06 Escape Hybrid and love it! Will it pay off? Probably not. Unless I keep it for over 10 years, or gas continues to climb, and then there is the replacement battery issue. I plan on trading it in when my Phoenix Motor Cars SUT comes in. I'm on the list to get one but I doubt it will get to the East coast anytime soon.
While driving my Escape, I get a lot of questions about, "Will it pay off" to drive one of these? I ask them how far they have to drive their Hummer to pay off the premium they paid. I guess you have to be a bit of a "Tech-no-geek" to get into this stuff. I enjoy several benefits with driving the Escape over my old car, a 97 CRV.
It's bigger.
Rides better.
Has more acceleration.
CRV got 18-20 MPG
Escape gets 30-35 MPG
Escape has a bigger tank with better mileage so I stop every other week instead of every week.
I'm not one of those Hybrid guys doing 40 MPH in the fast lane, trying to get another tenth of a MPG, but I do enjoy trying to get more from a gallon when I'm not in the way.

If you get into the Escape Yahoo group, you would be amazed at the technology involved in this thing.
Only a large company like Ford, GM, ... can afford to invest in this. Not something you're going to create in your garage.
Things like...
10K miles for an oil change, because of little stress on the engine plus the "down-time"
You will probably replace the rear brakes before the fronts since regenerating is captured through the front wheels. (the brakes on all 4 wheels are electronically controlled)
at 6 MPH, the regen drops out and goes totally to hydraulic.
The low compression 4 cyl engine is called an "Atkinson Cycle" that is pretty low on power but maintains your highway speed very efficiently, while the combo of the 2 electric motors and the 4 cyl give you better acceleration then the V-6.
Reverse is pure electric. The engine may be running but never "Parrallels", or assists the electric in reverse.

The more I learn about this car the more I'm impressed!

It's not for everyone, but niether are Fiero's.

Kevin

------------------
85 Fiero-based ASPP GT-40 MarkII. 3800 S/C, Auto, Held suspension all around with 2" drop spindles and sport fr. end. RCC bump-steer correction. Mr. Mike's interior.

quote Originally posted by GT40 Kit 3.8 SC: jscott1, This stuff isn't for everyone....Only a large company like Ford, GM, ... can afford to invest in this. Not something you're going to create in your garage.

True, if it were easy, GM would have spit out several hybrid models by now, but they are only just now starting to trickle out with the Saturn Vue, and now the Tahoe. A Fiero hybrid could be built, but it's likely to not be very user friendly and probably less efficient than the comparable gas only version.

So what would happen if say we ditched the generator idea and made something for an around town cruiser?

Or, another option, I could get something other than a fiero as I have a friend that has an older astro van that's been sitting for a little while that he hardly ever uses. That would surely have a bit more room than a fiero.

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Or, another option, I could get something other than a fiero as I have a friend that has an older astro van that's been sitting for a little while that he hardly ever uses. That would surely have a bit more room than a fiero.

More room but a lot heavier. Ideally, you want a small hatchback car such that you can mount a rectangualr battery box in the back, the motor and controller up front and still have decent room for a passenger and the back seat area for cargo.

The most practical conversion for the average person is to take something like a Geo Metro or the old VW Rabbit and convert it to an all electric vehicle using lead acid batteries and a DC motor. I know it's low tech, but for less than $5K you could have something that you can drive arund town, with maybe 50 mile range.

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: So what would happen if say we ditched the generator idea and made something for an around town cruiser? Or, another option, I could get something other than a fiero as I have a friend that has an older astro van that's been sitting for a little while that he hardly ever uses. That would surely have a bit more room than a fiero.

I would skip the Astro. Rather than fully explain why at this point, I'll direct you to some good reading material on chassis selection for a conversion.

Once again, you might look here:
http://www.electroauto.com/index.html

From the FAQ pages on the Electro Automotive site.

"What's the best chassis for conversion?
There is no single "best" chassis for conversion. There are always trade-offs, and you have to decide your priorities. You want something as light and aerodynamic as possible that's still strong and roomy enough for 16 - 20 batteries, with accessibility for periodic battery maintenance. In general terms, this means most manual transmission 4-cylinders compact sedans and light trucks are possible. Some 6-cylinder ones will work, but not as well. 8-cylinders are almost always too heavy. Hatchbacks are good.

The most popular models are VW Rabbit, Porsche 914, Honda Civic, Honda CRX, Ford Escort, and aircooled VWs. In pickups, the popular choices are the Chevy S10, Ford Ranger, and Mazda pickups. Pickups do not have as much range as sedans.

If you are looking for the easiest car to convert, that would be the Rabbit or Porsche 914, because there are fully pre-fabbed custom kits available for these models. The trade-off here is cost, because you pay more for all that design and prefabbed parts. The benefit is a quick, easy installation with a proven design. This can be done in as little as 40-60 hours if you are relatively handy with tools.

Next easiest would be a pickup because of all the nice open battery space available. This would be a lower cost, more generic kit, but would require more of your time and effort to design and fab the custom pieces. The same general situation would apply to a car other than the Rabbit or 914, but the design would be a little tougher, due to a smaller, more complicated battery space. This is at least 200 hours' work.

You can optimize a car for speed or acceleration, usually at the expense of range. This means using lighter batteries that may smoke tires and hit high speeds, but may only give 20-30 miles range.

Many people want to optimize for range. The Voltsporsche has been our best performer in this respect. In good real life conditions (some in-town and some freeway, relatively flat, smooth traffic flow, warm weather, efficient driver) it can do 80-100 miles. (You wouldn't want to depend on that range on a daily basis, as you want some reserve for unexpected traffic snarls and detours, etc.)

However, the Voltsporsche is a 2-person car. For 4 people plus a load of groceries, something like the Voltsrabbit is a good choice. The basic version uses 96 volts, but there is an option for 108V (2 more batteries under the rear seat) for a little more speed and range.

If low cost of conversion is your priority, an aircooled VW might be the choice. It doesn't need power brakes or a rear motor mount, and 96V is about the most you can fit into it. The trade-off will be a very basic level of performance, and you'll probably have to sacrifice the back seat to batteries.

If you fill out our free Project Review Form, we can analyze your particular driving needs, and recommend what type of chassis and system might be best for you.

Do I need to keep the clutch and transmission?
The conversion does retain and use the original transmission and clutch. The DC electric motor's rpm limits are very similar to those of the original gas engine. For this reason, the electric motor needs the transmission to achieve a full range of performance from standstill to freeway speed.

The clutch is needed for several reasons. For one thing, it makes the car much easier and more pleasant to drive. Although you can drive without a clutch, it requires developing a very fine skill to do so without starting with an abrupt jerk. The clutch also reduces wear on the transmission parts, and acts as a safety feature, so you can easily disengage the motor from the wheels if you develop a problem while under power.

Does it have to be a manual transmission?
Automatic transmissions are almost never used in conversions, for several reasons. We do not deal with them at all. Automatic transmissions have energy losses that reduce performance. Also, the shift points will not be appropriate on hills, and may damage the motor. Finally, the automatic relies on an idling engine to keep the hydraulic pressure up. When an electric car stops at a stoplight, the motor stops turning, and the transmission loses pressure. When the light turns green, there is a delayed response to the throttle while pressure builds up. This could be dangerous. The problem can be fixed by causing the electric motor to idle at stops, but this wastes energy. Or you could add a separate pump for the transmission, but this adds expense, complication, and a possible failure point.

What about power accessories?
Most of the vehicles best suited to conversion are economy models without a lot of power accessories. However, power windows, radios, CD players, etc., are no problem if you do have them. The EV still has a 12V accessory battery. This is charged by a DC/DC converter, which taps the main battery pack at a very low amperage to keep the accessory battery charged.

Most of these vehicles do not have or need power steering. It can be accommodated if you have to have it, but it will add several hundred dollars of expense to the project.

You DO want power brakes if you have the option. You will be adding a lot of weight to the car, and you need to be able to stop safely. This can be handled easily with a vacuum pump, reservoir, and switch."

Take their advice and use a manual trans. Odds are that the Astro is equipped with an automatic.

As I said before, FWIW, I quickly eliminated the Fiero as a potential donor for several reasons, including limited interior room, limited cargo space, etc.

Ultimately decided that an early VW Rabbit or Dodge Omni would be more practical. There are probably plenty of other models that would have fit my parameters, but sadly, the Fiero simply was not one of them.

For the most part, I limited my choices to FWD cars so that a battery box would not need to be designed around a drive shaft.

Why a Rabbit or an Omni. Part of my reasoning relates to availability or a ready made adaptor. Check out the list available from Electro Automotive:
http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/adaptors.shtml

RABBIT/GOLF: A complete installation kit is available. Still plenty of donors out there at bargain prices.

OMNI: Very similar to the Rabbit. Easy to upgrade to 5x100 bolt pattern (the Omni GLH as well as most other Dodge FWD cars came with 5x100). Thus, I can have a good selection of cheap wheels, including any of my Fiero wheels. Brake upgrades are readily available. You can easily adapt the front brakes from the FWD mini vans. Likewise, rear disc brake conversions are readily available, including slotted rotors if you want (might be nice for the extra weight that you will be hauling around). And, I happen to have a bunch of Dodge FWD parts available.

OTHER DODGE FWD: Virtually any 2.2 or 2.5 equipped FWD Dodge product would be a good candidate. Daytona can be made to look good. If you have your heart set on a mini van, there are a few early models (86-90) out there with stick shift. Neons are becoming available at bargain prices.

NISSAN PULSAR NX: I considered this a good candidate since it is a bit more versatile than the others. The hatchback can be easily swapped for a sport back giving a significant increase in cargo room; or the hatch can be removed along with the T-tops for a relatively nice sunny day cruiser. Adaptor is available. Plenty of donors out there (with manual trans).

NISSAN AXXESS: Pure utility, but a little heavy. Might be a little hard to find.

HONDA: Civics are light and plentiful. The CRX would be a nice little cruiser for two, but these tend to cost more (lot of them have been converted to race cars). The Civic wagon looks good. Fairly light; not too hard to find with a stick shift; cute and simple.

MITSUBISHI (Dodge) COLT: Adaptor available. Hey the early ones came with the twin stick which would give you 8 forward gears (and two reverse). Might want to consider the COLT VISTA: small outside, but lots of room inside. Very versitile, and should be available with a manual trans (but, alas, no twin stick).

GM: Pick any GM FWD equipped with a manual trans using the same bell housing as Cavalier 3.1 or Fiero. Should be plenty of choices out there.

There are plenty of others, My offerings are just food for thought.


------------------
FierOmar

[This message has been edited by FierOmar (edited 07-20-2007).]

Electro auto is run by a guy named Mike Brown. Mike wrote a book on EV conversions way back in 1993 called "Convert It". In his book he specifically points out the Fiero as a bad choice. I recently attended a workshop presented by him. As hi-tec as EVs might seem to most people Mike's ideas for them are still from the dark ages. He doesn't want to hear about the many new and lighter battery types available today. If you have seen the conversions that others have done with the Fiero using his technology its no wonder he doesn't like the car. Ironically he'll still sell you the trans adaptor plate though.

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: Electro auto is run by a guy named Mike Brown. Mike wrote a book on EV conversions way back in 1993 called "Convert It". In his book he specifically points out the Fiero as a bad choice. I recently attended a workshop presented by him. As hi-tec as EVs might seem to most people Mike's ideas for them are still from the dark ages. He doesn't want to hear about the many new and lighter battery types available today. If you have seen the conversions that others have done with the Fiero using his technology its no wonder he doesn't like the car. Ironically he'll still sell you the trans adaptor plate though.

PePe-LePu_For_2 - I agree with everything you just said...unfortunately I agree with Mike Brown as well.

Although it's ancient technology, like I said earlier, for the average person the best way to make an electric car is with a small front wheel drive hatchback using DC motors and lead acid batteries.

It pains me to say that, because I would love to build a high tech car using AC motors and lithium ion batteries. But if it was easy you would see them all over the highway and you do not, for a simple reason, it's not cost effective yet to build such a car. If you had a few million burning a hole in your pocket you could do it, but for the average person it's not going to happen.

Lithium ion batteries are the best yet batteries devised by human minds, but they have a serious drawback when you try to scale them up...if a single battery shorts it will go into thermal runaway and take the surrounding cells with it and next thing you know the whole pack goes up in flames that make the 4th of July look like a firecracker. The Tesla and tZero and others are attempting to overcome this with bomb proof containers, but it's not an easy thing to do. We at NASA have been developing large lithium ion battery packs, but we recently abandoned a design after three years and many millions of dollars later because the cells would eventually short out and catch fire.

Even if you had the perfect battery, the ac motors and motor controllers are not cheap. There is not a huge market for these things, and it's not like you just run down to radio shack and get a 200v to 300v AC motor controller.

Then there is the Fiero...the small trunk in the rear, and the poorly packaged front end, (thanks to Pontiac) make the Fiero a poor choice. For someone on this forum, with our knowledge of the Fiero it might still be worth it to pick the Fiero though. For example, every Fiero electric conversion I have seen still has the bulky pop up headlights. Not only is that a waste of electricity, they waste space. I would add flush mount headlights, and put a battery each under the headlights. Stuff like that might offset the poor packaging of the base Fiero.

All in all, a high tech electric conversion would cost $10K to $20K even using available technology, and in the end it wouldn't be as nice as a brand new Prius. So the most bank for the buck is to make a low tech DC conversion for $5K to $10K

I should probably explain where I'm coming from with the points that I've made so far.

The following is a brief history of how I have come to my current state of mind on EVs.

Before the GM Ev1 ever hit the streets I was already a huge fan of it. I collected many of the trade publication articles on it that were printed at the time it was in development. When I compared the performance of its 100 kw drive system to that of the available DC conversions it was the clear winner. It produced smooth flat torque from relatively low RPM all the way to near max RPM. It also had regenerative braking, a feature that is still practically unheard of with DC systems. Before they were done with it, it also had a large-scale Ni-Mh battery pack that was much smaller and lighter than an equivalent Pb battery pack. It had many other hi-tech features that I fell in love with as well. For me it has been and still is the benchmark that I compare all EVs to. But, try as I might I could never get my hands on one. It's probably just as well that I didn't because as everyone knows by now they were all taken back and destroyed. It was then time for me to start developing plan B. By then I already had three new Fieros under my belt and I began to realize that there was a similarity to the floor pans of the Fiero and the Ev1. The Ev1 had the drive system located in the front and a T-shaped battery pack that fit up inside the center tunnel of the body. I started to picture those same components placed into the Fiero but with the drive system in the rear and the battery once again fitted up into the center tunnel but facing in the opposite direction. I then got started looking for equivalent components to use and I also bought Fiero #4 to use as the donor. That's when I learned that the large format Ni-Mh batteries that GM used were no longer available to the general public (due to one of the oil companies having purchased the patent rights to them.) That really fried my butt and made me even more determined to build an EV. But, my project would have to wait due to a couple of other discoveries that I made. Once I found out that AC Propulsion designed GM's AC inverter/motor system I then got in touch with Tom Gage (their president) in an effort to find out if I could purchase one. When he told me that I could but it would set me back $25k I knew that I’d never sell the idea to the wife. Especially considering that the battery pack that AC Propulsion built to use with it in their T-Zero concept car cost many times more than it even.
Now I’m looking at plan C. A cheaper but also lower power configuration. There are at least three other companies that make AC drive systems and some of them have units in the sub 150kw range. And as I stated earlier I’m also holding out for the Firefly Pb batteries. Even though safer and more potent lithium sulfur cells are just now emerging, the complexity of the battery management systems and the construction of the packs has turned me off to lithium. Besides, Firefly is predicting energy and power densities similar to Li-Ion and at a weight much less than existing lead acid designs. It’s much easier to construct a pack using 28 large format batteries than it is to do it with 6800 (18650 type) cells like Tesla did. That’s why GM went with the large format (Ovonic) Ni-Mh packs instead of a multiple mini cell design for the Ev1.

The final nail in the coffin for a Michael Brown configuration for me is that my door-to-door round trip commute is exactly 80 miles each day with 95% of it all freeway. That doesn’t allow for the occasional side trip to the bar with the buddies or to the dentist office. To make maters worse, my current employer has stated that they have looked into putting in charging stations (per my request) and have decided against it. They cite cost as the main reason and lack of interest from other employees as the secondary reason. Of the dozen or so MB style Fiero conversions I’ve seen so far, none would suit my situation. In fact the only MB style conversion I’ve seen that comes close is his Porsche 914 package. That solution gets me to my next peeve. I simply won’t have my solution to pollution and imported oil be imported its self.

While it is correct to say that his technology would do just fine for many people it just won’t work for me. Besides, I also would like to retain the use of the trunk space. I’m confident that it can be done with the more energetic Firefly batteries

And finally, I'm stuck on doing a Fiero conversion because even before the Tesla Roadster came to be I figured that the best way to get other people interested in EVs was to show them one that looked cool and was still fun to drive. Alas, Tesla beat me to it.

Another thing I'd like to add really quick, every says so far that the fiero isn't a good choice because of limitations of space. Bear in mind that the motors I'm wanting to use are mounted in the wheel well and require no transmission, therefore the entire trunk/gas tank space are compeletly available, I'd think so batteries might fit in there but I could be wrong.

Secondly, not that I'm anti things that work already, but, I'd prefer to focus on the possibility of using the wheel motors and not brushed DC motors. (we already know from the Mike brown guy about the brushed idea, so let's think something new)

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: not that I'm anti things that work already, but, I'd prefer to focus on the possibility of using the wheel motors and not brushed DC motors. (we already know from the Mike brown guy about the brushed idea, so let's think something new)

Like I said earlier...good luck to you, I hope you do it, because it will be fun to watch. But as you already know it's not going to be easy and it certainly isn't going to be cheap. But it will be majoryly cool.

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Another thing I'd like to add really quick, every says so far that the fiero isn't a good choice because of limitations of space. Bear in mind that the motors I'm wanting to use are mounted in the wheel well and require no transmission, therefore the entire trunk/gas tank space are compeletly available, I'd think so batteries might fit in there but I could be wrong. Secondly, not that I'm anti things that work already, but, I'd prefer to focus on the possibility of using the wheel motors and not brushed DC motors. (we already know from the Mike brown guy about the brushed idea, so let's think something new)

When I first heard about the wheel motors I thought they were the best idea since sliced bread. Then I looked at the spec sheets. Those things are pretty darn heavy when you consider that their mass gets added to the un-sprung mass of the suspension. That could result in some ugly handling. I'm no expert on suspension systems but it just seems to me like a potential problem.

lmao..
an electric car engineer for a major car company once told me
if the car had been invented with an electric motor...
and someone designed an internal combustion engine for it
it would be heralded as a major invention of the last century.

My thoughts, wrong car to mod why bother? Really, it's a sports car! Electric converson would work better on something really tiny. I for one dont like the limited range strait electrics have nore the poor preformace unless youre willing to limit your range even more.

------------------
[IMG]



Trueleo.com/fiero.htm
RSpiderII@aol.com

quote Originally posted by vortecfiero: lmao.. an electric car engineer for a major car company once told me if the car had been invented with an electric motor... and someone designed an internal combustion engine for it it would be heralded as a major invention of the last century.

It was... except it happend two centuries ago.

The electric automobile was invented between 1832 and 1839 using non-rechargeable cells. In the late 1880 electric automobiles flourished. In the year 1899 electric vehicles outsold all other vehicles.

The automobile as we know it is generally accepted to have been invented by Gottlieb Daimler and Carl Benz in 1885. Although they used a gasoline engine, the electric cars were more popular because they were quiet ,very clean, had less vibrations and thought to be safer. Electric cars didn't need gears, even back then, and of course they were self-starting, unlike the gas cars of the time that had to be cranked.

It wasn't until Henry Ford made the gasoline powered cars less expensive and crude oil discoveries in Texas made gasoline relatively inexpensive that the gasoline powered cars took off in popularity.

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: When I first heard about the wheel motors I thought they were the best idea since sliced bread. Then I looked at the spec sheets. Those things are pretty darn heavy when you consider that their mass gets added to the un-sprung mass of the suspension. That could result in some ugly handling. I'm no expert on suspension systems but it just seems to me like a potential problem.

That's not an issue as you replace everything from the wheel bearing out. wheel bearings, calipers, rotors, pads, all that stuff is not light either.

quote Originally posted by Francis T: My thoughts, wrong car to mod why bother? Really, it's a sports car! Electric converson would work better on something really tiny. I for one dont like the limited range strait electrics have nore the poor preformace unless youre willing to limit your range even more.

Did you read that part about 0-62 in 4.5 seconds and a top speed of roughly 140 MPH? if that's poor I'll take it.

Anyways, if it comes to a point where I need a DD type car I'll get something like a Geo metro for the old style type conversion, but I'm not putting a brushed DC motor in a fiero. It'll either be these wheel motors, or I'll stick with a gas engine

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Did you read that part about 0-62 in 4.5 seconds and a top speed of roughly 140 MPH? if that's poor I'll take it. Anyways, if it comes to a point where I need a DD type car I'll get something like a Geo metro for the old style type conversion, but I'm not putting a brushed DC motor in a fiero. It'll either be these wheel motors, or I'll stick with a gas engine

And how much running time/range was left after such a run. I guess I didnt see where you said it was for a race car and not a DD. Sure as a race oly, electircs can go fast.

------------------
[IMG]



Trueleo.com/fiero.htm
RSpiderII@aol.com

Just for fun, I thought I'd post a picture of a real electric car. It's a 1917 Detroit Electric. What's really unique about the car in the photo is that it's not restored ... except for the batteries and the tires it's 100% original, even down to the upholstery. As you can see from the photo, it's not in a museum but in a private garage. (For security reasons, I won't reveal where.) It's in running condition, licensed and insured, and the owner occasionally drives it on the street.




Concerning the technical issues, carefully consider what jscott1 and PePe-LePu_For_2 have to say. It appears that I am the only person who has posted in this thread so far that has actually done engineering work on a commercial electric car project, and the information they are giving you is virtually 100% correct. Admittedly, the electric car project I was briefly involved with was over 30 years ago and it was the "brainchild" of a convicted con man, but the research and engineering I did was real. The technical fundamentals have changed surprisingly little in the last 30 years. Battery efficiency and energy density have increased with some of the newer technologies, but so have the costs.

Concerning the use of regenerative braking: 1) Using regenerative braking alone the car will never come to a full stop, since the dynamic braking effect drops to zero as the car speed approaches zero. It is possible to use battery power to supplement the dynamic braking, but in that case the net energy cost is even higher than with conventional friction braking. 2) The claim that "85% of all power used to turn the motors is caught back with the engine braking" is just not true. (Also note the incorrect use of the word "power" in the claim, unless it is a clever, intentional misrepresentation.) It is possible that an efficient regenerative braking design can recover 85% of the vehicle's kinetic energy in a stop, but that wasn't the claim. Consider that it requires a lot more energy to move a car 10 miles at a given speed than it does to move it 1 mile, but the energy recovered in stopping the car will be the same in both cases.

As jscott1 hinted earlier, the innovative transmission in the Prius is an engineering tour-de-force that is primarily responsible for the success of the overall design. This transmission uses a single planetary gear set to seamlessly mix the instantaneous power requirements of the car with the combustion engine output, electric motor output, and generator load. Simply elegant!

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Did you read that part about 0-62 in 4.5 seconds and a top speed of roughly 140 MPH?

I've also read about a 200 mpg carburetor. Until these performance claims are verified by an independent third party, they are just so much hot air. Unfortunately, wild claims like this damage the credibility of anything else the car's developers might say about it. By the way, I have a bridge I might consider selling you if you're interested ....

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 01-07-2009).]

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: Just for fun, I thought I'd post a picture of a real electric car. It's a 1917 Detroit Electric. What's really unique about the car in the photo is that it's not restored ... except for the batteries and the tires it's 100% original, even down to the upholstery. As you can see from the photo, it's not in a museum but in a private garage. (For security reasons, I won't reveal where.) It's in running condition, and the owner occasionally drives it on the street.

Wow! is that garage in Kansas City by any chance?

I would love to see an original unrestored electric car.

The Prius and it's amazing transmission make a hybrid practical, but it is just short of alien technology, no homebuilt is going to match that technology.

The electric car does have a future as battery technology eventually improves, but right now full electrics are a definite niche product and not very cost effective. The Nanosafe battery technology is promising. NASA has evaluated the claims and so far it seems legitimate. Now if the cost would drop by a couple of orders of magnitude there is a chance that electrics can achieve the popularity they had over 100 years ago.

[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 07-25-2007).]

Just found a very detailed electric Fiero for an old post
It finally answers the age old question of how far you can get with a Fiero full of batteries (76 miles)

http://www.evalbum.com/1590

quote Originally posted by Renegade blob: Just found a very detailed electric Fiero for an old post It finally answers the age old question of how far you can get with a Fiero full of batteries (76 miles) http://www.evalbum.com/1590

What is interesting about this conversion is that the car gets 76 miles on a full battery charge. However, that figure is probably based on summer driving. In the cold winter months battery capacity can plunge as much as 50% so the range may be 38-50 miles plus without a heater you'll freeze your ass off. I guess the heat issue can be solved with a portable catalytic propane heater but with such a limited range it doesn't take you too far from home. The other concern is what happens in stop and go traffic?

------------------
" THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, 3.4" Pulley, N* TB, LS1 MAF, Flotech Exhaust Autolite 104's Custom CAI 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite.
87GT - 3.4L Turbocharged engine, modified TH125H
" ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "

i had thought of using 100 horse forklift motors to build one .i have done this before on a volkswagon jetta. it worked very well i have no pics i did not own a cammaera at the time but it was perty peppy i had three motors on it.