Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > DIY / How-to
Register Now
 Register Now

Now available from EcoModder: ScanGauge II fuel economy gauge.  Click for details.  

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-21-2009, 09:40 PM   #11 (permalink)
chop suey
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 6,641

Blue - '93 Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 F150 XLT
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 559
Thanked 690 Times in 491 Posts
no diff


(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2009, 12:35 AM   #12 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: seattle
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
no diff
yah, without a differential you'll drag the inside tire around corners because both tires will be traveling at different speeds as your turn. I suppose you could just power one wheel or use two motors on different wheels. I like the idea though.

PS Do it and show us how you do it
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2009, 12:47 AM   #13 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,236

Herbie - '86 Golf Diesel
90 day: 51.89 mpg (US)
Thanks: 868
Thanked 294 Times in 248 Posts
LOL I forgot about the no diff thing... would be great in a straight line though!

Ok, so diff stays, motor gets mounted to diff... IRS is still a better option though, b/c with the motor mounted hard to the diff, it's putting more weight on the suspension. with IRS, you're putting no more weight on the suspension than was already there, and you're not incurring any more frictional losses than you would be with a solid rear axle.

In fact, I tend to think you're actually incurring slightly less losses with IRS, b/c you're only subjecting the diff itself to fluid drag, and the axles never see the associated "swimming".

Of course, given that CV axles are most efficient when working in a straight line (in a line that would be suited to a solid axle), you're probably losing that same efficiency gain b/c they're almost never straight.

It still would reduce suspension strain though, (unsprung weight) which is everyone's complaint when coupling motors directly to wheels, even though you can get rid of a large amount of weight at each wheel when using electric motors. (You don't need brakes anymore, technically.) (Legally, you still need them.)
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"


I'd like to think that people might open their eyes at some point... instead, I find it more and more likely that I'll just close mine.

-- Author kept secret.

Je ne veux pas d'une meilleure vie. Je veux être heureux avec celle que j'ai maintenant.
(I do not want a better life. I want to be happy with the one I have now.)


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 02:53 AM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Im new to this whole idea so bear with me while i try to explain it. What about trying something like this in a pontiac fiero. Mid-engine RWD, so you can use the front, one motor on each wheel. You would get the better regen braking, increase performance and get better mileage from the ICE. my biggest question on that is how do you get the front wheels to travel at the same speed as the rear?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 04:31 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
The Atomic Ass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Mason, OH
Posts: 498

2-Wheeled Mule - '06 Burgman 400
90 day: 84.89 mpg (US)

Max - '01 S-10 LS
90 day: 24.7 mpg (US)

Twin Powa - '05 Ninja 250
90 day: 79.09 mpg (US)

Ransom - '01 Bravada
90 day: 16.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 9
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to The Atomic Ass
Quote:
Originally Posted by bendr06 View Post
Im new to this whole idea so bear with me while i try to explain it. What about trying something like this in a pontiac fiero. Mid-engine RWD, so you can use the front, one motor on each wheel. You would get the better regen braking, increase performance and get better mileage from the ICE. my biggest question on that is how do you get the front wheels to travel at the same speed as the rear?
You don't, really. Realistically, you can get away with separate throttles for both electric and ICE, and under light throttle it'll self-balance. Ideally, you would use a controller that provided traction and torque management to both engines at the same time.
__________________

ASE certified day-dream engineer

I'm making beautiful music's now, hear it and like me on Facebook!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 09:34 PM   #16 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
basjoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 680

Aerocivic - '92 Civic CX
Last 3: 70.54 mpg (US)

AerocivicLB - '92 Civic CX
Team Honda
90 day: 72.29 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 104 Times in 58 Posts
The Poulson hybrid system mounts two 7 hp electric motors on the outside of the rear wheel hubs of a FWD car. They are designing it so it can be installed on any FWD car.
__________________
aerocivic.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2009, 09:51 AM   #17 (permalink)
Mechanical Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 189

The Truck - '02 Ram 1500 SLT Sport
90 day: 17.57 mpg (US)

The Van 2 - '06 Odyssey EX
90 day: 18.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Christ View Post
Of course, given that CV axles are most efficient when working in a straight line (in a line that would be suited to a solid axle), you're probably losing that same efficiency gain b/c they're almost never straight.
If you're adding electric RWD to an otherwise FWD car you can save some coin or get more robust shafts with universal joints as rear wheels do not steer. Also universals shouldn't be run straight anyway (it keeps the needle bearings from spinning properly), so you'll be good.

IRS would be better, but not all vehicles start out with IRS and this conversion would be problematic for suspension mounts. You could turn a beam rear axle to a live axle, body-mount the motor and shaft-drive the diff to minimize unsprung weight, although a live axle adds a lot over a beam axle in a FWD car.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2009, 01:40 AM   #18 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Posts: 164

Red Egg - '95 Aspire
90 day: 38.51 mpg (US)

Dodge SRT-4 - '04 Neon SRT-4 2.4L Turbo
90 day: 26.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I posted a similar thread about 6 months ago, called poor mans hybrid. obstacles would be for the end user, having to modulate two throttles. The guy putting it in himself wouldn't care. Not everyones a "mad scientist" so being user friendly would drive the cost and the research up, only afforded by the big car companies. I would totally go for one with a small ac motor in the back operated with a twist throttle, and relocate the e-brake handle or something.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2009, 03:20 AM   #19 (permalink)
Ethanol Fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 222
Thanks: 15
Thanked 14 Times in 9 Posts
I've had the same thought, since there hasn't been a light weight RWD compact since the 240sx. Everything's FWD and the Rear is where I'd want the acceleration to go. Making a hybrid just seems the practical solution except everything would have to be DIY fabrication.

Please link your topic getnpsi. I'd like to see it.
__________________
~Allch Chcar
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2009, 04:17 AM   #20 (permalink)
101% win
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Where I live
Posts: 1,354

Camryaro - '92 Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Toy - '82 Pickup
90 day: 24.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 81
Thanked 63 Times in 42 Posts
I don't think the two throttles would be a huge problem since mixing and matching would only be done during WOT, at least IMO. If we're going slow, just shut off the engine because low load efficiency blows anyway, and if we're above a certain speed where it makes sense to run the engine because it's operating efficiently enough, just make sure the electric motor in the rear doesn't engage unless we turn it on or we have something where it'll kick in at WOT or similar. Doing something similar with RWD is a bit easier as long as there is enough room to mount the motor behind the trans and shorten the driveshaft to accommodate the motor. From what I've read there's a ~1-2% drop in mileage at lower speeds due to spinning the motor around, but it's easier to use, and we can even run accessories on electric power by engaging the gear box assuming we can kill engine ignition, although it's pretty lossy spinning an entire engine over just to run an A/C compressor.


(Support Ecomodder.com & get rid of these annoying ads!)      
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Electric car conversion: Project ForkenSwift MetroMPG Fossil Fuel Free 979 12-26-2011 10:37 AM
DIY Rubber Front Wheel Skirts newtonsfirstlaw DIY / How-to 32 05-19-2011 08:45 AM
Hydrogen Generator Experiment willy57 DIY / How-to 473 03-04-2011 03:29 PM
mileage computer for a carbureted engine diesel_john Instrumentation 162 07-18-2010 06:31 PM
smart cdi (diesel) owner from BC, Canada smartzuuk Introductions 23 04-10-2010 01:22 PM




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com