rear engine EV conversion.

[Clev]

It's not a matter of tastes, it's a matter of practicality. There's no advantage to having the motor in the rear. If you're putting the motor in the rear because you think shorter cabling means more efficiency, you're in for a real surprise when you try to do an emergency lane change with the motor and all your batteries in the rear. At least with everything in the front you'll get predicable understeer.

But just to humor you, here's what's involved with each of your choices:

1. AWD Eclipse. You're going to throw out the drivetrain and couple the motor/tranny directly to the rear diff, I assume. That means that you'll have to mount the motor/tranny to the suspension as unsprung weight; otherwise, there will be no provision for the motor to move relative to the suspension. (On RWD cars, the driveshaft takes care of this; on FWD cars, it's the CV shafts.) Throw a 200 pound motor and 125 pound tranny on your suspension as unsprung weight, and you'll probably crack a rim every time you hit a pothole.

2. CRX. You might be able to adapt the FWD transmission to the rear. You'd have to swap the ring gear so you don't end up with five reverse gears and one forward. You're also cutting out a big chunk of the floor to fit the motor/tranny package in there, adapting drive axles and rear suspension from an AWD Civic to fit. And then you have no room for batteries in the back at all.

3. BMW 8-series. The 840s only came with autos, so you're looking at an 850i. The 6-speed is pretty rare, so you're going to pay $15,000 for a 1991 model, cut up the floor and weld in motor/tranny mounts, put all of the weight in the rear for "drivetrain efficiency", and end up with a slow porker (base weight is over 4,000 pounds) that can't accelerate (it got 0-60 in 7.2 seconds with a freaking V-12) or corner (all of the weight in the back for driveline efficiency), and you'll end up selling it for less than half you paid, since nobody wants a Bimmer that somebody's hacked up, and you find out there's no thrill in a 8 series that goes 0-60 in 35 seconds.

[Winfield1990]

I find it funny how many assumptions you make.

the biggest assumption is you think im going with shorter cabling for efficiency , its because its cleaner.

awd eclipse , I never said I was going to use an AWD , so thanks for assuming I was going to, so you could have another invalid point to argue , since when you put the crx information it pretty much cancels out to where you can choose this or the other but put it in a way , that makes it sound like there are two problems...

I how there are so many help forums out there , that dont really have people on there that try to help. just make assumptions to criticize , criticize is fine as long as there is understanding and conversation , not ignorance and bashing.

I love how you put in hyperbole figures for a 0-60 time on the bmw when in fact it theoretically it would have a faster 0-60 time. Which I mentioned when I started my posts it was not ment to be a racing , or thrill ful car but for mpg , so yet again another assumption that you must of not paid attention to or completely disregarded to make another false validation for a point.

Goodbye , there are better forums , no offense to other members on the board. Just the ones who do not read just pounce with made up information. If you have questions to ask for your concerns ask them before you criticize to get a picture or else miscommunication just annoys people.

[Winfield1990]

I will say you were on the crx assumption , people who make assumptions without communicating annoy me. So goodbye.

One more note before I leave , did I say my batteries were in the rear , I clearly pointed out they would not be , yet you disregarded that in the beginning of your post.

*waves*

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Winfield1990

I find it funny how many assumptions you make.

the biggest assumption is you think im going with shorter cabling for efficiency , its because its cleaner.

Oh, silly me for assuming. You said:

the motor is there to be close to the drive wheels for efficiency and closer to the batteries.

But obviously I'm just making assumptions. Even if you're going with shorter cabling because "its cleaner", that doesn't change the fact that for the cabling to be shorter, the batteries have to be right next to the motor.

awd eclipse , I never said I was going to use an AWD , so thanks for assuming I was going to, so you could have another invalid point to argue , since when you put the crx information it pretty much cancels out to where you can choose this or the other but put it in a way , that makes it sound like there are two problems...

Ah, so you're going with a FWD Eclipse, which is actually HARDER to do that the AWD. So include everything I said about the Eclipse, and add that you'll have to adapt axles and suspension (from, surprise, an AWD Eclipse) if you want to get any power to the rear wheels. And then enjoy having that motor and tranny hanging off your suspension. It's going to ride like a garbage truck.

I how there are so many help forums out there , that dont really have people on there that try to help. just make assumptions to criticize , criticize is fine as long as there is understanding and conversation , not ignorance and bashing.

You asked for a list of what you would need to do to make it work. I gave it to you. Take my list and go to any other forum, and after they stop laughing, they will agree with everything I said, and probably list another 20 fabrication steps I haven't even thought of.

I love how you put in hyperbole figures for a 0-60 time on the bmw when in fact it theoretically it would have a faster 0-60 time. Which I mentioned when I started my posts it was not ment to be a racing , or thrill ful car but for mpg , so yet again another assumption that you must of not paid attention to or completely disregarded to make another false validation for a point.

You're thinking of converting a 4,000+ pound car to electric, insisting that the motor be in the rear, because you're going for MPGs. Yeah, good luck. And good luck with faster 0-60 times; it will take about $40,000 in motor and batteries.

Goodbye , there are better forums , no offense to other members on the board. Just the ones who do not read just pounce with made up information. If you have questions to ask for your concerns ask them before you criticize to get a picture or else miscommunication just annoys people.

Absolutely. You hop right on over to the Bimmer forums and tell them you want to buy a rare 6-speed 850i, rip out the V-12, cut out the floor to convert it to rear engine, and install an electric motor and several thousand pounds of batteries and let us all know how that works out for you.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Winfield1990

I will say you were on the crx assumption , people who make assumptions without communicating annoy me. So goodbye.

One more note before I leave , did I say my batteries were in the rear , I clearly pointed out they would not be , yet you disregarded that in the beginning of your post.

*waves*

Aren't you gone yet?

You said that the cables would be shorter because of "driveline efficency" and because "its cleaner". That means that the batteries are right next to the motor, right? Or is your car circular in shape?

[Winfield1990]

batteries and motor are next to the drive wheels for extra weight over the tires.

Why would the things you said for the AWD eclipse apply for a FWD eclipse , when I could do the same things as a fwd crx that you stated? Keep in mind this is with an electric motor so stock engine , transmission doesnt fit the bill.

Just naming off information has nothing to do with my car choices really helps with what im doing , such a great help. Order of operation for brainstorming and problem solving I think starts with gathering information.

The car would be converting cause I like the car , if Im making a car electric , why would I try to keep stock weight , when weight and aerodynamics are the biggest factors in car efficiency? It may be heavy to start with but thats what fiberglass and plastic is for. May not be the optimal car but like I said I stated it because I also liked the car.

Just because its a bmw , as one option what would the bimmer forum offer for these modifications that I am wanting to do not for every car how would that really apply? Honestly I would much rather tell them my plans than you because then they would actually ask what , why , how , instead of immeditately freaking out.

And for clarification , the only person on this forum that I am talking trash back to is you. Because you are the only one who is purely disregarded with your information , you must not of had many conversations growing up , or never got to get a word in where you just feel obligated to get a false point across.

[Winfield1990]

Go back and read what I posted...

im not doing the engine for weight distribution thats what the batteries are for , under the floor and in the rear where the rear seats are or are not depending on the vehicle the motor is there to be close to the drive wheels for efficiency and closer to the batteries.

just because the motors closer to the wheels for efficiency thats not because of driveline efficiency and quotations around a falsely quoted quote is a great way to get your point across..... btw...

Efficiency due to traction , efficiency due to weight saving by not having as big of mechanical parts to make connections to the wheels. efficiency without a term coming before it is a general term.

Also "That means that the batteries are right next to the motor, right? Or is your car circular in shape?"

you got the first part of my quote right just to ask a question , but only in a sarcastic manner you obviously do not know the meaning of a real quote because you did not use it in any meaningful way so I wil ASSUME SO.... but if my car is infact like I already stated and you quoted on just above... the batteries are next to the motor , what would the circular shape of the car have anything to do with changed how the batteries are next to the motor ?

you cant change a true statement with an off the wall question...
example:
the cat is black right? , its raining outside so is it still black? NICE QUESTION clev , need to start asking the questions at the beginning of the conversations before their already answered by the poster.

and I am still here just to point out your misundestandings and assumptions , and now... whatever you say im gone. only reason besides pointing out the above.... Was I was looking in control panel for an account deletion check box or link which I cannot find.

So please , whoever is in the charge of the forum , please erase my account. Not just block , or cancel , but remove please. Thank you and im sorry for this rubbish being applied to your forum. There was no disrepect for the forum on my part done on purpose.

[Frank Lee]

A most intriguing thread.

[Clev]

Sigh.

Originally Posted by Winfield1990

batteries and motor are next to the drive wheels for extra weight over the tires.

So you want all of the weight over just the back wheels. That's fine; just remember that it's going to handle like crap and probably swap ends when you want to make an emergency lane change. It also doesn't do a thing for efficiency.

Why would the things you said for the AWD eclipse apply for a FWD eclipse , when I could do the same things as a fwd crx that you stated? Keep in mind this is with an electric motor so stock engine , transmission doesnt fit the bill.

Got it, so you're not keeping the stock transmission either. So we're down to cutting the floor out, hanging the engine and transmission off the suspension (increasing unsprung weight by 300+ pounds), making custom motor and transmission mounts, custom drive axles, adapting the rear suspension from an AWD or RWD car and heavily beefing up that suspension to handle the weight of all those batteries. Oh, and fabricating some custom shift linkage so you can shift it correctly. And filling up your trunk with batteries, since now that you've got the motor and transmission in the back, you can no longer sink the battery box into the trunk floor.

That about cover it?

Just naming off information has nothing to do with my car choices really helps with what im doing , such a great help. Order of operation for brainstorming and problem solving I think starts with gathering information.

That's because none of them is a good choice. You asked what kind of work would be involved. We listed the various things you'd have to do, along with the immediate and obvious caveats. As soon as you started to bring in excuses (it's for efficiency! It's cleaner! It's for the MPGs!), I started calling you on them. If you had just said, "because I think it's cool," there would have been no argument, but since you continue to not only insist that your idea is technically better, but to ridicule people for pointing out the obvious glowing flaws in your foolproof plan, you're not going to win anybody to your side.

The car would be converting cause I like the car , if Im making a car electric , why would I try to keep stock weight , when weight and aerodynamics are the biggest factors in car efficiency? It may be heavy to start with but thats what fiberglass and plastic is for. May not be the optimal car but like I said I stated it because I also liked the car.

Great, so you like the car. Put the motor in the front, spread the batteries around for 50/50 weight distribution and drive what is otherwise a gorgeous and well-engineered car.

Just because its a bmw , as one option what would the bimmer forum offer for these modifications that I am wanting to do not for every car how would that really apply? Honestly I would much rather tell them my plans than you because then they would actually ask what , why , how , instead of immeditately freaking out.

I know the why. You alternately say it's cleaner, more efficient and somehow better to bodge up a massively rear-heavy car. I don't know you from a hole in the ground. If you want to waste your money and cut up a perfectly good car, you're only wasting your own time.

And for clarification , the only person on this forum that I am talking trash back to is you. Because you are the only one who is purely disregarded with your information , you must not of had many conversations growing up , or never got to get a word in where you just feel obligated to get a false point across.

Yup, when you can't win, insult the other person. Go ahead and point out one false point I've given. The only sin I've committed here is not agreeing with your idea that a tail-heavy Frankensteinned contraption isn't a waste of time and energy.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Winfield1990

Go back and read what I posted...

im not doing the engine for weight distribution thats what the batteries are for , under the floor and in the rear where the rear seats are or are not depending on the vehicle the motor is there to be close to the drive wheels for efficiency and closer to the batteries.

just because the motors closer to the wheels for efficiency thats not because of driveline efficiency and quotations around a falsely quoted quote is a great way to get your point across..... btw...

You're doing the batteries for weight distribution, but you have to have them near the rear axle for efficiency. So which it? Either the batteries are in the FRONT of the car for proper weight distribution, or they're in the REAR of the car for 'efficiency.' Or, you know, you could put the motor in the front and the batteries in the back like everybody else, and then upsize your wiring by 10% to make up the difference.

Efficiency due to traction , efficiency due to weight saving by not having as big of mechanical parts to make connections to the wheels. efficiency without a term coming before it is a general term.

Oh, right! I forgot the driveshaft! That's where I've gone wrong! Mount 300+ pounds of motor and tranny to the rear suspension so you can save 12 pounds on a driveshaft! Why didn't BMW think of that? Excuse me, I need to call the patent office...

you got the first part of my quote right just to ask a question , but only in a sarcastic manner you obviously do not know the meaning of a real quote because you did not use it in any meaningful way so I wil ASSUME SO.... but if my car is infact like I already stated and you quoted on just above... the batteries are next to the motor , what would the circular shape of the car have anything to do with changed how the batteries are next to the motor ?

Because you said the batteries would be used for weight distribution, but they also are next to the motor for efficiency. If the batteries are in the front and back simultaneously, and the car is shaped like a regular car, maybe there's some kind of gravitational anomaly I'm not aware of.

you cant change a true statement with an off the wall question...
example:
the cat is black right? , its raining outside so is it still black? NICE QUESTION clev , need to start asking the questions at the beginning of the conversations before their already answered by the poster.

You mean the poster who has already contradicted himself? Are they in the front for weight distribution or in the back for efficiency? I suspect we'll need to fire up the Large Hadron Collider to answer this one.

and I am still here just to point out your misundestandings and assumptions , and now... whatever you say im gone. only reason besides pointing out the above.... Was I was looking in control panel for an account deletion check box or link which I cannot find.

So please , whoever is in the charge of the forum , please erase my account. Not just block , or cancel , but remove please. Thank you and im sorry for this rubbish being applied to your forum. There was no disrepect for the forum on my part done on purpose.

Where have I heard this before? I suspect there's a time loop of some kind now.