EV Digest 5973
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: EVLN(Lithium-ion battery fires concern auto enthusiasts)-Long
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Subject: Re: Zilla controls backordered? - range or speed
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Pass on the "Go" (Long rant), was: EVLN(The Electric Vehicle is a big
tease)
by "Jorg Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Brake lights on regen
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Brake lights on regen
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Chip Gribben in the News
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) RE: Brake lights on regen
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: LED brakelights
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Pass on the 'Go' (Long rant),
was: EVLN(The Electric Vehicle is a big tease)
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Brake lights on regen
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Brake lights on regen
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: LED brakelights
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
by "torich1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: LED brakelights
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: question to victor
by Jake Oshins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: LED brakelights
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Chip Gribben in the News
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: LED brakelights
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: LED brakelights
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Chip Gribben in the News
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: AC and DC together?
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Zilla BackOrder
by Steve Lacy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: AC and DC together?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Begin Message ---
Jukka Järvinen wrote:
There is nothing "state-of-the-art" in laptop "BMS". They have designed
it to prevent fires and misuse. No magic inside. Actually most patented
methods to make good BMS are faulty. Including Intel and few other "big"
players patents.
I agree completely! Most of the BMS systems just to the minimum they
think they can get away with. Given the lack of experience than many
designers have with batteries, they often guess wrong!
I'm not eating so easily their explanation on poor material and
separator failure. I smell politics...
I am sure that a lot of work has been going on to figure out exactly
what caused the fires. I am also sure that it will be kept a closely
guarded secret, and not published anywhere in the public media. Every
company's lawyers will be telling their engineers to "shut up!"
In the long run, the information will still leak out. Engineers will
tell a friend of a friend, go to conferences, change companies, etc.
Someone will sue someone, and the technical facts will come out under
oath, or from subpoenaed documents. But this will take a while. It's
still too early to know *exactly* what went wrong with these batteries.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have had better performance and effiency in the past, I have messed
something up.
Before I exploded the comm, I got 320 Wh/mile and could lay 2 black
stripes for 6 feet off the line.
I let the batteries sit while the motor was out and tried to keep them
manually charged up 1 at a time with my cheap as sears charger and may
of damaged them or, perhaps the motor after rebuild has more advance and
that is what I feel.
The performance now is adequet off the line and impressive after about
15mph.
Range? It is about 16 miles to 80%, I used to get 24 miles to 80%
This is based on 80% of 34ah per Orbital. (they are 50ah at 20hr rate
and 34ah at the 1hr rate has been mentioned on the list)
so 270V(avg) * 34ah= 9180 * .8 = 7300Wh
when I divide by 320 it is 23 miles
when I divide by 466wh/mile I currently get... it is 15 miles So the
math equals reality :-(
I never designed it for range, I wanted some zip. Now it is my primary
form of transportation.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Wow, thanks for the post Chris.
How about range? Did you get the 5-7 miles they advertise?
jorg
On 10/4/06, Chris Robison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I really can't let this one go by without saying something. The Go 2000X
has actually been out for many months -- over a year I believe, and
apparently represents only a small improvement over a product I purchased
about 3 years ago with highly mediocre results.
I bought the Go 1500X after seeing the glitzy advertising and admiring its
sleek shape -- not much bigger than a regular unpowered board scooter,
very collapsible and portable, and very little external evidence that it's
powered at all. I also was drawn by its promises in the marketing
materials of the time, of "twin 750W motors" implying that the board
should have performance to match its appearance.
Oddly, when I made the purchase, I noticed that the boards were rather
hard to find. As a matter of fact, the few places selling them online were
only selling them as refurb units -- I took this as a warning, but jumped
anyway because this also meant the prices were about half retail. When it
arrived, the "refurb" condition was actually unnoticeable -- it arrived in
absolutely pristine, still-polished condition. I wonder if the refurb
label was some sort of excuse for the low liquidation price.
First of all, the "twin 750W motors" bit was a ruse, a play on words --
the two motors *together* were 750W, not that you could really tell by
riding it. A board this light with 1HP to push it should accelerate *MUCH*
faster than the Go Motorboard actually does. In fact, the Go will not even
start from a stop -- you have to push off, like with the cheap old Zappys.
The board is then fairly lazy to achieve its modest 15mph top speed.
Second, the 1500X had no suspension, and hard urethane wheels. Vibration
was pretty severe, and affected the hands as well as the feet. The
handlebar at its maximum extension was too low for me to ride comfortably,
and the hard, sharp-edged trigger is uncomfortable to hold for long
periods.
The throttle itself was a pretty tricky thing to operate. The scooter
regen-brakes, but it's dangerous to use regen for maximum braking, because
of how the control is designed. Instead of a separate control for regen,
regen activates automatically as you release the throttle. Release further
for more regen. Coasting happens when the throttle is released all the
way. This means that maximum braking is in a throttle position that is
difficult to distinguish from no braking at all. I crashed at least 3
times from the brakes suddenly letting go, before I gave up on using regen
and just used the simple friction brake on the back wheel.
If regen braking was hairy, acceleration was often even worse. The
manual's warning to "never ride in water" is accompanied by stickers on
the scooter itself screaming the same warning. They really mean it.
Actually, the warning doesn't go far enough -- what they mean is, "never
ride in any moderately damp conditions whatsoever. Do not allow the wheels
to become moistened." Here's why. That supposed 1HP of drive power is
coupled to the wheels via a friction drive. And not the hardcore "EV
Warrior" style bite-into-the-tire friction drive.
The hard urethane wheel is squeezed between the two motor output shafts,
which each have a smooth metal cylinder approximately the size of a pencil
eraser. The shafts thus spin against the side edges of the wheel,
resulting in a total contact patch approximately the size of a toenail
clipping. And if you get the sides of the wheel wet to any degree -- an
early morning ride accidentally brushing up on some dew-dampened grass was
all it took for me, you suddenly lose *ALL* traction, as the motors
instantly spin up to crazy-high speed. Within a fraction of a second, they
dig/melt little ruts in the wheel where the shafts are spinning like
crazy, and from then on your ride is punctuated by a clack-clack-clack as
the shafts pass by these ruts in the spinning wheel and cause a certain
shortening of the life of the motor bearings.
Why didn't they mold gear teeth into the sides of the wheel rim? Or use a
chain? Or *something* ??
The physical build quality of the scooter is fantastic. Absolutely as good
as they say it is. The main hinge is indeed a work of art, and the welds
in the beautifully formed and polished aluminum housing are flawless. The
design is beautiful, especially when the thing is new and the wheels are
still glossy. But it seems like they had a team of skilled engineers that
left halfway through the product development, and they finished the job
with college interns.
As far as I know, the only of these problems that the Go 2000X has solved
is the suspension; they've added a small set of springs to the front.
Perhaps they've altered the behavior of the regen braking as well, but I
doubt it. Based on my experience on the 1500X, there are way too many
flaws to recommend this poorly-considered, underpowered product to anyone.
As a comparison, I later purchased an Exkate X-24 powerboard, which also
claims to have a 1HP drive. The extreme difference in power is nothing
short of breathtaking.
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How about an "ignition-on" voltage powering a small relay.
Thru this relay runs a wire from the negative side of the shunt thru an
optocoupler to the other side of the shunt. This optocoupler powers the
relay to the brake light.
The extra relay off of ignition keeps the brakes light from coming on
during chargeing :-)
The optocoupler only lets current go one way so it only activates during
negative amps(regen)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Jeff,
The idea is a good one, but the implementation as described
is not possible.
Most shunts are designed to allow 50 mV drop at max current,
while an opto coupler requires 1.5V to open.
If you would drop that voltage in a shunt, it would
generate 750W (=1 pk loss of power)
so I am afraid that more electronics would be needed to
make this work (amplify the voltage across the shunt).
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Jeff Shanab
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 8:15 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: Brake lights on regen
How about an "ignition-on" voltage powering a small relay.
Thru this relay runs a wire from the negative side of the shunt thru an
optocoupler to the other side of the shunt. This optocoupler powers the
relay to the brake light.
The extra relay off of ignition keeps the brakes light from coming on
during chargeing :-)
The optocoupler only lets current go one way so it only activates during
negative amps(regen)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does anyone know why reporters have an attention span shorter than other
parts of their anatomy. They very seldom report anything correctly. That is
where the old saying comes from that says: "Don't believe anything you read
and half of what you see" :-)
Roderick Wilde
---- Original Message -----
From: "Curtis Muhlestein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 6:22 PM
Subject: RE: Chip Gribben in the News
Does anyone know why the batteries have only a "life span of about four
months"? I thought that you could get 10,000 to 15,000 miles on a set of
batteries.
Curtis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Stensland
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 6:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Chip Gribben in the News
W. Laurel driver pushes electric transportation, by Steve Earley -
Gazette.Net
For West Laurel resident Chip Gribben, every trip in his royal blue
1985 Ford Escort is a declaration of independence. As the multiple
signs, stickers and emblems on the vehicle advertise, his Escort is
powered by electricity, and thus not subject to the whims of the world
oil market. ''To me, freedom is driving electric," said Gribben, an
asthmatic who also likes that the car is virtually pollution-free...
(continued)
Here's the story link...
http://www.gazette.net/stories/100506/laurnew180753_31940.shtml
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date: 10/4/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date: 10/4/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rush,
The stress on regen is comparable to the stress on take-off,
as the power during regen cannot be (much) larger than the
power the controller is feeding into the motor.
(It can be slightly larger if the controller is current
limited, as the charge voltage of batteries is higher
than the discharge voltage. Also the losses in the
controller may come into play if the battery current is
the limiting factor.)
But in general, regen is the same as driving, only the
controller causes the torque in the motor to be in the
opposite direction, therefore the motor is generating
current iso eating it.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Rush
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 5:15 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Brake lights on regen
Mike wrote -
> My truck can stop incredibly fast with regen set to 100%.
So does the issue of mechanical stress upon the drive components come into
play at any point during regen, especially if it is set to 100%?
It seems that from just a straight braking point of view regen might be a
worth while mechanical advantage over drum and/or disk brakes. No wear and
tear on the brake system, or at least much less, and it adds trip and
battery life.
I think I am getting to like this regen thing...
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
SuperFlux does not use a heatsink. SuperFlux was designed to use its 4
electrical leads to draw off the heat.
It's really well designed for mounting on a PCB. The primary factor in
the design wasn't to put it into lamp socket. Lamp sockets make no
sense for designers since the device will never need replacing in the
product's lifetime.
As a warning, a lot of LED mfgs do misuse LEDs. The original T1-3/4 LED
pkg wasn't designed for high power levels. As technology made very
powerful LEDs possible, there's now LEDs which are easily capable of
3x-10x more output than they could ever sustain without damaging the die
from heat stress over time. It's now common practice to take an LED
rated for 100,000 hrs under ideal conditions, run it at twice that power
level and bundle it in an LED cluster where the leads can't dissipate
the heat anymore and even the plastic cases are potted together so
there's no airflow between devices. The heat not only makes them
inefficient (the lumens/watt output is a factor of temperature), but
over time the high heat levels do permanently degrade the devices' output.
Danny
Lee Hart wrote:
Danny Miller wrote:
SuperFlux LEDs are pretty powerful and very high quality components
(not a finished device). Each one has several times more power than
a common T1 3/4 LED can create. They were designed with a wide
viewing angle.
Does anyone build a lamp replacment with a superflx LED? It would be a
challenge as they need a heatsink. As a guess, maybe it would look
like a #1157 lamp with an attached reflector. The reflector is
polished aluminum, to also serve as the heatsink.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, October 5, 2006 10:06 pm, Jorg Brown said:
> Wow, thanks for the post Chris.
>
> How about range? Did you get the 5-7 miles they advertise?
>
> jorg
Indeed, I should give credit where credit is due. I never had any trouble
with range. It achieved at least their claimed range, with my 230lbs and
relatively level terrain.
Mine currently sits in my attic unused; the last time I took it out, the
front wheel bearing failed (ball bearings popped out, now the wheel
rattles and shakes as it spins), and I decided not to replace it as it was
over $30 per replacement wheel at the time. Now they're going for $25 on
Amazon, and about $15 on eBay as I just noticed.
--chris
>
> On 10/4/06, Chris Robison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I really can't let this one go by without saying something. The Go
>> 2000X
>> has actually been out for many months -- over a year I believe, and
>> apparently represents only a small improvement over a product I
>> ...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mechanical stress is regulated by the tire traction. The drivetrain is
not harmed at all. At least not in the 9500 miles I have on it :)
I can and have literally driven all over town without touching the
brakes for stopping, just for holding on an incline while stopped.
On my truck there is a shifter for an automatic transmission. Park is
used to hold the flywheel in place when parked, as it's a manual 5
speed. Drive is set for zero regen, 2nd for 50% and 1st for 100%
regen. So I was told to try zero % on the freeway. No data taken yet
to see if it makes a difference.
I'll be doing a comparison between regen at zero % and 100% over a
course of like 10 or 20 miles to see how much regen actually
contributes. We lack data in this area.
The old Prius packs had the most incredible regen deceleration ever.
Those modules were measured at 7 milliohms each. So with 5 sets in
parallel the truck would toss me forward very hard during decel on
100% regen. Quite a bit harder than the nicads I have now. Although
the nicads are nothing to sneeze at.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mike wrote -
>
> > My truck can stop incredibly fast with regen set to 100%.
>
> So does the issue of mechanical stress upon the drive components
come into play at any point during regen, especially if it is set to 100%?
>
> It seems that from just a straight braking point of view regen might
be a worth while mechanical advantage over drum and/or disk brakes. No
wear and tear on the brake system, or at least much less, and it adds
trip and battery life.
>
> I think I am getting to like this regen thing...
>
> Rush
> Tucson AZ
> www.ironandwood.org
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There are a couple of current pickups in the Dolphin. It's feasable to
tap one of their outputs and drive a circuit like you describe. The
opto would have to drive a fet or something to have enough power to
energize a relay.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How about an "ignition-on" voltage powering a small relay.
> Thru this relay runs a wire from the negative side of the shunt thru an
> optocoupler to the other side of the shunt. This optocoupler powers the
> relay to the brake light.
>
> The extra relay off of ignition keeps the brakes light from coming on
> during chargeing :-)
> The optocoupler only lets current go one way so it only activates during
> negative amps(regen)
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps from
the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then there are
the 2 running light elements as well.
The problem is that my S10 uses those in line sockets so the leds would
have to be installed at 90 degrees in order to point rearward.
Mike
--- Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SuperFlux does not use a heatsink. SuperFlux was designed to use its
> 4
> electrical leads to draw off the heat.
>
> It's really well designed for mounting on a PCB. The primary factor
> in
> the design wasn't to put it into lamp socket. Lamp sockets make no
> sense for designers since the device will never need replacing in the
>
> product's lifetime.
>
> As a warning, a lot of LED mfgs do misuse LEDs. The original T1-3/4
> LED
> pkg wasn't designed for high power levels. As technology made very
> powerful LEDs possible, there's now LEDs which are easily capable of
> 3x-10x more output than they could ever sustain without damaging the
> die
> from heat stress over time. It's now common practice to take an LED
> rated for 100,000 hrs under ideal conditions, run it at twice that
> power
> level and bundle it in an LED cluster where the leads can't dissipate
>
> the heat anymore and even the plastic cases are potted together so
> there's no airflow between devices. The heat not only makes them
> inefficient (the lumens/watt output is a factor of temperature), but
> over time the high heat levels do permanently degrade the devices'
> output.
>
> Danny
>
> Lee Hart wrote:
>
> > Danny Miller wrote:
> >
> >> SuperFlux LEDs are pretty powerful and very high quality
> components
> >> (not a finished device). Each one has several times more power
> than
> >> a common T1 3/4 LED can create. They were designed with a wide
> >> viewing angle.
> >
> >
> > Does anyone build a lamp replacment with a superflx LED? It would
> be a
> > challenge as they need a heatsink. As a guess, maybe it would look
> > like a #1157 lamp with an attached reflector. The reflector is
> > polished aluminum, to also serve as the heatsink.
>
>
Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently
The ones that change the world!!
www.RotorDesign.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK my orginal email said KTA does not list their products!!!! so what r u
trying to prove.
> OK one more time, it SAYS:
> "the following company provides products"
> It does NOT say, "The following company sells OUR products"
>
> All it says, is that if you want to build an EV, you can buy EV components
> from KTA (as well as many other places), it does NOT say that you can buy
> UQM products from KTA.
>
> Got it?
>
> If you are still in doubt, write/call them or KTA.
>
> >
> > 6. I am converting my car into an electric or hybrid electric
> > vehicle.
> > Can I buy one of your motors for my project?
> >
> > No. We only sell motors and electronics to original equipment
> > manufacturers or their suppliers. However, the following company
provides
> > products to EV enthusiasts:
> > KTA Services Inc.
> > Electric Vehicle Components and Systems since 1984
> > http://www.kta-ev.com
> >
> > Top
> >
> >> It says that KTA supplies products to EV enthusiasts. KTA supplies
> >> products, but not UQM products.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Behalf Of torich1
> >> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 11:01 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >>
> >>
> >> This umq web site say they sell thru KTA!
> >>
> >> http://www.uqm.com/about/FAQ.html#8
> >>
> >> > UQM does not sell through KTA.
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > Behalf Of torich1
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:19 PM
> >> > To: [email protected]
> >> > Subject: Re: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > They say you can buy their product at http://www.kta-ev.com BUT!
KTA
> >> makes
> >> > no mention of this product in their catalog....
> >> > Rich Va
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Andrew Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > To: <[email protected]>
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 5:08 PM
> >> > Subject: RE: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > yeah, just buy 100 of them. LOL.
> >> > >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > > Behalf Of MARK DUTKO
> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:33 PM
> >> > > To: [email protected]
> >> > > Subject: Re: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > does anyone know a way to source one at a reasonable price? Seems
> >> > > like a great solution.
> >> > > On Oct 4, 2006, at 12:27 PM, Andrew Roberts wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > The batteries are from www.altairnano.com, and you forgot one
> >> major
> >> > > > thing
> >> > > > about the UQM motors: they weigh half as much as the Enova (or
> >> > > > solectria or
> >> > > > siemens) systems at the same power level. They're also
physically
> >> > > > smaller.
> >> > > > I know that was one of the driving factors in Phoenix's decision
> >> to
> >> > > > switch.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > > > Behalf Of Don Cameron
> >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:22 PM
> >> > > > To: [email protected]
> >> > > > Subject: RE: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Hi Mark, Phoenix has been around for a while and a few years
back
> > was
> >> > > > planning on using motor/controllers from Enova. You might want
to
> >> > > > ask if
> >> > > > they have delivered any vehicles yet before counting on a vehicle
> >> > > > two years
> >> > > > out. The UQM motors are very interesting as they have big torque
> >> > > > and a wide
> >> > > > power band. I know that in quantities of 10 or so, the price of
> >> > > > the UQM
> >> > > > might drop to about half. Still pretty pricey compared to some
of
> > the
> >> > > > motors available today.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > What batteries and how many are they planning on using?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
> >> > > >
> >> > > > see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-
> >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> >> > > > Behalf Of MARK DUTKO
> >> > > > Sent: October 4, 2006 11:05 AM
> >> > > > To: [email protected]
> >> > > > Subject: Phoenix motors/UQM Drive
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I spoke to an executive at Phoenix Motor Cars who said the target
> >> > > > price for
> >> > > > the SUV with 150-200 mile range would be $45K. The UQM drive
> >> > > > according to my
> >> > > > conversations with them is about $28K with controller, and the
> >> > > > batteries
> >> > > > must be at least $15K, all purchased in one unit quantities. So,
> >> > > > $44k just
> >> > > > in batteries and drive and it will be sold for $1k more as a
> > complete
> >> > > > vehicle. If this can be delivered in a quality package in a year
> >> it
> >> > > > will say
> >> > > > much to how fast things are moving. The UQM drives are made to
> >> > > > order in
> >> > > > Colorado and I think the SUV comes from Korea but not positive. I
> >> > > > may just
> >> > > > have to forget my conversion and buy something new in a year or
> >> > > > two, but I
> >> > > > really don't want an SUV! Perhaps the R1 will be available?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Mark
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >> > > Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/462 - Release Date:
> >> 10/3/2006
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >> > Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date:
> > 10/4/2006
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date:
> >> 10/4/2006
> >>
> >>
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> > * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
> > * This post contains a forbidden message format *
> > * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
> > * Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
> > * If your postings display this message your mail program *
> > * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> >
> > ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C6E89D.A5C2BBB0"; type="text/plain--
> >
>
>
> --
> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
> legalistic signature is void.
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date: 10/4/2006
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 08:55 PM 10/5/2006, Mike Phillips wrote:
I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps from
the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then there are
the 2 running light elements as well.
Wow, you must have BRIGHT brake lights. 900W of power!
Somehow I don't think your brake lights are pulling 3A out of a 300v pack.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor usually doesn't respond to my e-mail either. He claims that he
never sees it, which I believe, as there's no reason not to. He always
seems to see stuff posted here, though.
- Jake Oshins
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lawrie, Robin
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 5:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: question to victor
Just a quick one.. I tried to contact you off list regarding motor
specs, your [EMAIL PROTECTED] address, but ive had no reply..did it get
through?
Thanks..
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 09:20 PM 10/5/2006, John G. Lussmyer wrote:
At 08:55 PM 10/5/2006, Mike Phillips wrote:
I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps from
the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then there are
the 2 running light elements as well.
Wow, you must have BRIGHT brake lights. 900W of power!
Somehow I don't think your brake lights are pulling 3A out of a 300v pack.
Oops, now I see the decimal point.
I still doubt your brake lights are pulling 90W of power!
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Curtis!
Before this stirs a hornets nest that was a typo on the part of the
Laurel Gazette. In the interview I told the reporter "4 years" and he
wrote "4 months".
I also told him my first battery pack lasted 5 years and the
batteries in my GE Elec-Trak have lasted 10 years.
I called the reporter this morning about the error and he said they
will put in a correction blurb in the next issue. He apologized
profusely and said he missed it when he proofed the article before it
went to press.
Chip
On Oct 5, 2006, at 10:43 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: "Curtis Muhlestein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: October 5, 2006 9:22:22 PM EDT
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Chip Gribben in the News
Does anyone know why the batteries have only a "life span of about
four
months"? I thought that you could get 10,000 to 15,000 miles on a
set of
batteries.
Curtis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The emeter shows a drop of .3 amps when I step on the brake pedal. With
out more accuracy it could be .21 amps at 300v. 60w is close to 3 brake
lamp elements IIRC.
Mike
--- "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:20 PM 10/5/2006, John G. Lussmyer wrote:
> >At 08:55 PM 10/5/2006, Mike Phillips wrote:
> >>I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps
> from
> >>the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then there
> are
> >>the 2 running light elements as well.
> >
> >Wow, you must have BRIGHT brake lights. 900W of power!
> >
> >Somehow I don't think your brake lights are pulling 3A out of a 300v
> pack.
>
> Oops, now I see the decimal point.
> I still doubt your brake lights are pulling 90W of power!
>
> --
> John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
> http://www.CasaDelGato.com
>
>
Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently
The ones that change the world!!
www.RotorDesign.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> >I'm wanting to replace my 3 brake light bulbs as they pull .3 amps from
> >the 300v pack thru the dc-dc. That's just a plain waste. Then there are
> >the 2 running light elements as well.
>
> Wow, you must have BRIGHT brake lights. 900W of power!
>
> Somehow I don't think your brake lights are pulling 3A out of a 300v
pack.
>
>
You missed the (.) in front of the 3 - still, 90 watts seems like a lot.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> OK my orginal email said KTA does not list their products!!!! so
what r u
> trying to prove.
>
>
So can we stop all this dithering: UQM doesn't sell to individuals,
and redirects hobbyists towards KTA instead - that's it in a nutshell.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Does anyone know why the batteries have only a "life span of about four
> months"? I thought that you could get 10,000 to 15,000 miles on a
set of
> batteries.
>
> Curtis
Four years, longer or shorter depending on useage - most well-managed
lead-acid packs in freeway-capable EVs last 20-25K mi, no matter the
time frame.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Don, if you are serious, I'd be happy to build you a fast car.
> I was considering building a C5 corvette with the AC55 motor, it would
> go into the trans tunnel and drives the differential, bats would be in
> the engine compartment.
> I'm don't see what two motors really does for you, the speed limitation
> is the batteries ability to delivery enough power to the motor(s).
> A big motor or two won't go any faster if the batteries can't run them.
But the AC55 peaks at 78kw - how fast of a car will that make? That's
half the kw of the smallest Zilla!
If all you want is power and *not* capacity, Hawkers are a better
choice (with proper management) - just ask Plasma Boy.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff Shanab wrote:
I have been hearing about the zilla back order from everyone except
Otmar so I shot him a quick email to see how lifes treating him. Since a
few people at work who drive golf carts between buildings all day have
taken notice of My EV and are asking about where to get parts.
Otmar Hasn't been able to keep up with the list but said he is currently
on Feburary's orders and doing soldering himself, but is really hopefull
about the new hire. I wonder if a "meet and solder" weekend to help hi
catch up would be a great EV weekend. Kind of take a break from racing
to pay homage to one of the driving forces :-).
I think this is a *great* idea. Does anyone here know what skill level
it takes to assemble a complete Zilla? Would it make sense to sell them
in "unassembled kit" form?
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Jack
I am serious and I am really up for building something that is fun to drive.
I looked at the Corvette 3100 pounds or so and about 100 other cars that I
thought should weigh less. I found the weight of all of them unacceptable. The
corvette I am guessing would be around 2500 pounds without the ICE and as an
EV adds 1000 to 1200 or more over the 2500. Would a single Solectria A55
motor make a 3600 pound vehicle fast? The Force weighed 2200 pounds and no one
would call them fast. The regen would stop you fast though I hardly ever used
the brakes and this is going down steep hills.
I have considered one of my several 1955 Chevrolet cars and they weighed
from the factory 3100 pounds and you lose at least 600 pounds taking out the
engine and cast iron powerglide. This would be about the same as the Corvette
but about as aerodynamic as a billboard.
Even the Vega weighs 2400 with an aluminum block and the Chevette is 2000. I
went into this before but I found several cars around 1970 to 1972 that I
should weigh between 1200 to 1500 without just the motors and transmissions. I
have gathered up several and am looking them over to see how I can customize
the body and convert them to an EV. This is why I was not to concerned about
having an extra motor and controller I have five bodies to play with. If the
two do not work out I can just power one of the others.
I agree with you the two motors without enough power would be a bad idea. I
think the Hawker is a better battery then the Optima at least what I have
seen on their DOD and cycle results. I had a hard time finding very much real
information on the Optima. Neither is a bargain when you consider their cycle
life. The Valance battery has a much longer life and would be a good battery
for a high voltage system pulling less amps. I like that it would be so easy
to do rather than the A123 that would need one to build a BMS for.
I started out thinking a single motor AC motor with a very light car but by
the time you start adding up what everything weighs it is more like 2600 to
2800 pounds and that might be an optimistic weight.
So it would not be in the same class as say the AC Propulsion tzero that
weighs under 2000 pounds that uses just one AC motor. It is kind of hard for
me
to go with the idea that a 3600 pound vehicle that is almost double the weight
of a tzero is going to be fast.
Don
In a message dated 10/5/2006 5:02:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don, if you are serious, I'd be happy to build you a fast car.
I was considering building a C5 corvette with the AC55 motor, it would
go into the trans tunnel and drives the differential, bats would be in
the engine compartment.
I'm don't see what two motors really does for you, the speed limitation
is the batteries ability to delivery enough power to the motor(s).
A big motor or two won't go any faster if the batteries can't run them.
Lead acid AGM's (Optima Yellow Tops) can pump the most juice of
available batteries, but they are heavy. The alternative is to ratchet
up the voltage instead using smaller current NiMH or Lithium batteries.
This is how the Tesla goes fast with a single relatively small motor.
I've been working with a smaller PM AC motor (BLDC) similiar to the UGM
but smaller that is going in the jetski. One could stack them to get
some big power, but I would think the AC55 is a better choice than 4-8
of the smaller motors.
Best Regards,
Jack
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I had a 97 Solectria Force for a while. I am not sure but is this the
same
> motor it had? It was a 156 volt system I don't know what bumping that up
to
> 312 would do but I am looking for a lot more performance than one single
motor.
> I plan not to have a transmission and that weight would be the second
motor.
>
> I live in an area with a lot of hills. An example of one is 3 Ah up and I
> could recover 1 Ah in one half of a mile in the Solectria. The S-10 NiMH
and
> Ranger trucks I drive do not have enough regeneration to stop the vehicle.
In
> fact it they gain speed and I have to use the brakes.
>
> I also want to this EV to drive more like a sports car. Valance batteries
> would be an option and I already have NiMH batteries but that would be
about
> 1100 pounds of batteries. For most my local driving I don't go over 20
miles so
> a small size Hawker could be another option. If I can buy the A123 battery
> that would be about what I need.
>
> I don't see a downside to having the two motors and if I don't like the
> results I can just spilt them up and use them on some other projects. From
the
> post on the list it sounds like my biggest road block would be buying a
Zilla
> Z1K or Z2K.
>
> I would consider the A55 motor if I could link two together. I noticed
they
> do weigh a lot. I not looking to just blow a mountain of money but I am
> willing to spend what it takes to build this.
>
> Don
>
>
> In a message dated 10/5/2006 1:14:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> I didn't think saving money was a priority:
>
>
>>>The DC motor and controller would be 10,000 the Siemens system cost
>>>15,000 total cost 25,000
>>
>
> ElectroAuto prices a complete AC55 conversion kit at $10,000
> Just the motor is $1,400.
> I've considered building a controller for the AC55 motor, and probably
> will, but I'll put it on the top of my todo list for $10K. :)
>
> Jack
>
>
> Lee Hart wrote:
>
>>Jack Murray wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But why not just use a big AC motor instead??
>>>Such as the Azure AC55, a 13.5" 177 ft-lbs
>>
>>
>>
>>Certainly; that's the obvious way to do it. It just costs more. I think
>>theoldcars was looking for a way to save some money.
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
