EV Digest 6490
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Blind EV's
by Lock Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Rich man's hobby?
by "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Looking for Electric Mower Suggestions for 1 acre
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: EV vs. ICE
by "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Blind EV's
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7)
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: KillaCycle YouTube video over 33,000 views
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE:
by "Myles Twete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
by Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: A few new KillaCycle photos (battery assembly)
by "C. Dreike, Advantage Automation, Inc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) EV competition classification question
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Mark Brueggemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Battery Woes
by TiM M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Airlabcorp nmih batteries
by Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Purpose-built, stripped of comforts?
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) RE: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
On Feb 28, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Roger Stockton wrote:
John mentions that one could reproduce the Zombie for about $18K;
subtract the cost of the donor car ($1K or less?), and this leaves
about
$17K spent on peformance mods. I've mentioned my buddy's Duramax
diesel
pickup (4 door, fully-loaded 4x4); I don't know how much he's invested
in the performance mods, but it is certainly a fraction of the $17K
available and he has run mid 12's on street tires with this daily
driver.
Didn't he just dump around 35k for the vehicle to start with? He seems
to be better off than most of the EV racers.
Sorry, but that bothered me because the cost of a vehicle is the cost
of the complete vehicle (conversion costs for EVs aren't magically
separate.)
Paul "neon" G
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I drive the sidewalks as a "scooter". Not a "mobility" scooter, as my
vehicle weighs more like a pedal bicycle, and can be as quick as a
pedal bicycle vs the speed-limited mobility scoots.
The "noise" I've been using is the "snap" of the sprung hand brake
handles with a quick squeeze and release. Something familiar to folks,
and accepted as a "wake up" EVerywhere pretty readily, I find.
I appeciate the quiet of EVs. Don't ask me to add any noise-makers. The
sidewalk scooter rider you met with was just being rude. Make the rude
ones sling a cow bell around their neck or something. The vast majority
of mobility scoot riders are respectful of their fellow travellers and
slow down as appropriate. They don't even see themselves as being in
any EV vanguard. They are just using their EVs to get buy.
BTW, if you haven't "driven" a mobility scoot, you have been missing
out. Seriously, you call yourself an EV-driver? Grab a mobility scoot
(good for 400lbs or so of rider and gear) plus your significant other
and a picnic, and hit the trails! Beach. Lakes shore. Whatever.
Mobility scoots are great picnic machines. If you understand life in
the slower lanes...
tks
Lock
Totonto
human-electric hybrid pedestrian
--- Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was sort of in agreement with the complaints (EVs shouldn't make
> noise).
>
> An event happened today that made me think that, perhaps, EVs should
> make
> noise. I was walking down the sidewalk when a personal mobility
> (totally
> silent electric) scooter nearly knocked me down.
>
> Maybe they should put noise makers on these things... starting with
> their members??? <g>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
EVs might be called a rich mans hobby as an EV is often a second or a third car.
Cars in general are expensive, though. Calculate a total cost per month for the
purchase
price plus maintenance plus fuel plus insurance, and you may be surprised how
much any car
costs you to use on a monthly basis. Insurance is an annual or semi-annual
cost. Fuel is
weekly or daily cost. Service costs are supposed to be regularly.
Roads and city planning are built around car transport so they are often seen
as a
necessity, especially by Americans and Europeans.
Steve -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Acuti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 6:38 PM
Subject: EV's: Rich man's hobby?
> I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I just wanted to point out some
> figures.
>
> I know it costs thousands of dollars to convert a donor car from scratch,
> especially if you use quality components. BUT- do you guys realize that as
> the population of EV's grows, they are becoming much more affordable? That
> there is a growing "used EV" population and market? Yes, it's small but it's
> happening. It's growing. I know because I've done it TWICE.
>
> I paid $2500 for a nearly turn-key Beetle. It only needed batteries. $1300
> later, I'm on the road. The donor car is in pretty darn good shape. It has a
> dented fender and the bumper needs adjusted so it will stop drooping but
> what little rust it has is under control and I'll clean it up with a little
> POR15. I've seen decent gas-powered Beetles sell for between $2500-$5,000
> dollars. Well I fall right in the middle.
>
> My first EV may not count in some of your opinions. It was a Comuta-Van ex
> postal truck. Top speed of 55 mph, seated 2 (if you installed the passenger
> seat). But hey, I installed an onboard charger and commuted in it for a
> year. I put a few thousand miles on it too. It was a truck so I hauled cargo
> from Home Despot and trash to the dump. I paid $2,000.
>
> Anyone look at the ev trading post lately? Several complete vehicles ranging
> from $5 - $25k. The fact is, anyone who is ambitious enough to read a book,
> read the internet and learn can build or own one of these vehicles now. It
> won't be a White Zombie or a Goin' Postal but these cars will get a lot of
> people to and from work and the grocery store.
>
> Well, the family and I are off to Chipotle's for some dinner. In the
> Beetle....;)
>
> Rich A.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find what you need at prices you'll love. Compare products and save at MSN®
> Shopping.
> http://shopping.msn.com/default/shp/?ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24102&tcode=T001MSN20A0701
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You may have gotten a deal. Those things are expensive but
well-supported so it's not hard to maintain/repair. The batts are no
problem to replace. Don't buy a new pack from Robomower, those are just
the ~17AH gel cells used in UPS and so such, just about the most common
battery around. It's a trick to pop open the batt pack's case but it's
way cheaper to just get batteries.
Danny
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have one of those! i got it from a buddy after the batteries croaked. Does
that make me a real EV owner?
---- Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
=============
Well yeah, the Friendly Robotics Robomower.
It's designed to run unattended. Earlier models you'd put in the yard
and press Start, later models have a docking station that they leave and
return to on a programmed schedule (can't automatically go between
unconnected lots like back to front of course). You have to stake down
a closed loop permeter wire to indicate your yard. It is slow, can take
hours or even multiple charges for a decent size yard, but being
unattended runtime is not especially important.
It's a pretty good system. Also it's just freakin cool. It is
expensive however.
Danny
Mark Hastings wrote:
I'm not sure if gas mowers have improved much over the
years but my my hacked together electric craftsman
mower is batteryless and I haven't found a reasonable
replacement for my acre yard.
Is there anything new out there I'm just not finding
for an electric mower that would handle that area
without taking days to mow?
I can only think of two options and I'm not sure
either would work.
I have thought about converting a gas reel mower. I'd
think the reel mower would be more efficient then a
tractor with a hydrostatic transmission. I don't mind
the walk but would it do at least half an acre if I
used two batts instead of the one the evalbum one has.
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/546
It just says 2 small yards. Here in some towns a small
yard is the 10ft to the curb in my town it is an acre.
My 2nd option is a trailer for the sears and stick
some big batts in there. There isnt' much if any space
up front I only had 42 volts of 30amphr bb600s as all
that would fit and that took about 4-5 charges to do
my lawn. The mower normally pulled 60-80amps when
mulching. If I put 4 EV145s in a trailer that would
add roughly 400lbs which I don't know if it could
pull. If it could and it didn't up amps that much it
may mow my yard.
If I had another use for the batteries, had a free
reel mower sitting around or had spare batteries I'd
just go do it. But it is all a little expensive to get
the stuff only to get disappointed that it won't work
and be stuck with stuff I can't use or return.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[sorry about the format here, gmail won't let me reply directly to a
digest - copied text separated by *************]
Doug Weathers wrote:
*****************
I'm sure you'll get a lot of feedback on this one. Let me start it
off. (Disclaimer: I am not a racer of either variety of vehicle.)
On Feb 27, 2007, at 7:29 PM, Chris Tromley wrote:
<snip>
Of course "comparable" is very difficult to define.
I think this is the problem in a nutshell. You say that EVs can't beat
comparable ICEs. I believe that they can and will, given a fair
definition of "comparable".
As far as heads-up racing, I would be interested to see how various
types of "comparable" cars would do against each other. Who would you
pick as the winner in the following races?
1) ICE vs. EV of equal hp
2) ICE vs. EV of equal timeslip (duh)
3) ICE vs. EV of equal cost
4) ICE vs. EV of equal weight
5) ICE vs. EV that puts out the same amount of noise
6) ICE vs. EV that puts out the same amount of C02
7) ICE vs. EV that have the same number of Kwhrs on board
8) Insert your own comparison category here
I'm not sure about 3) (John has written about owners of gasser racers
being shocked at how little he has spent on White Zombie to achieve his
timeslips), and I'm pretty sure that EV energy density compared to
gasoline would handicap the EV in 4) and 7). But otherwise, it looks
like the advantage goes to the EV. Theoretically, anyway, since we
don't have a lot of EVs that compare to the fastest ICE vehicles.
Did I miss something?
********************
Hi Doug,
Yes, I was thinking in different terms. Admittedly, not in terms most
people would grasp. First it's important to establish the *huge*
range in the capabilities of race vehicle builders. There are hordes
of weekend warriors out there (and some very dedicated amateurs, even
a few pros) who simply don't get that racing is very much a thinking
man's game. They don't innovate, they imitate. They have no idea how
good you need to be to run with the big dogs. I've seen this
first-hand among motorcycle road racers. Since motorheads are pretty
similar everywhere, I'm assuming it applies to drag racing too.
Give 100 builders the same kit of parts to build a quick drag racer.
No hardware variations allowed. Give them some time to work things
out. I'll bet the spread of ETs approaches two seconds, an eternity
in drag racing. There will be a very select few competing for fastest
in this group.
John, Bill, Dennis and Roderick (sorry, I was originally including
only currently active racers, but you certainly qualify as a top gun)
are all examples of racers who "get it". To take some variability out
of the comparison, I used the concept of same builder, similar effort.
********************
Imagine John had *not* been an EVer,
and instead simply dropped a crate V-6 into his little Datsun years
ago. Isn't his current EV a bit more elaborate than a typical engine
swap?
*********************
This is the question that no one has answered yet. John is no
stranger to ICE performance. I'll ask again - if he had concentrated
on a V-6 Zombie, how fast would he be? Getting 400 hp out of a
4-liter V-6 is no big challenge. A few years development will get you
beyond the estimated 450 hp in the Zombie's new pack. That V-6 and a
transmission weigh less than John's Siamese 8s and the battery pack
that feeds them. Those two facts, all else being equal, inexorably
lead to a clear advantage for the ICE. Same effort and expertise
spent on an ICE gives you better times.
What I said, and what many seem to be agreeing with, is not that EVs
are inherently inferior, but that EV racing is in its infancy. I'm
totally pumped about the progress the EV racers are making. I'm just
saying that assuming EVs will routinely kick ICE butt is senseless.
The EV racers we're talking about are at the top of their game. The
ICE racers are mostly the hordes.
Roderick Wilde wrote:
***********************
Chris, I'm going to have to side with GW and Jim on this one. I also noticed
that you didn't mention my Mazda which was doing 11 flat 8 years ago and
blowing the doors off the quickest production car in the world at the time.
Even the 2000 Dodge Viper Hennessy Venom with it's 800 horsepower and price
tag of over a quarter of a million dollars could only beat it by 3/10th of a
second.
************************
To be honest, I've never understood this kind of comparison. A
quarter million dollar designer muscle car isn't a race car. It's
driveway jewelry. Capable jewelry to be sure, but the only
comparisons that make any sense are between vehicles that have been
optimized for the same job. Maybe it's impressive to those who know
little of racing. Would it be as impressive if you had a drag race
between a drag racer and, say, a 250 mph Land Speed Record car or Indy
car? You'd probably beat either. At what point does it become
ridiculous?
When you think about it, this is the same kind of slanted, misleading
promotion that gets us all wound up when EVs are on the losing end of
it.
It's my contention that we don't need to stoop to these tactics any
more. We're right in the thick of it, holding our own and advancing
fast. We can't yet beat the top guns in the ICE world, and may never.
Many thanks to the EV racers who have carved out some very hard-won
respect among the ICE crowd. EVers everywhere can hold their heads up
higher because of it.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That may have been a case of a blind EVer.
Chip
On Feb 28, 2007, at 5:39 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: "Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: February 28, 2007 3:50:46 PM EST
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Blind EV's
I was sort of in agreement with the complaints (EVs shouldn't make
noise).
An event happened today that made me think that, perhaps, EVs
should make
noise. I was walking down the sidewalk when a personal mobility
(totally
silent electric) scooter nearly knocked me down.
Maybe they should put noise makers on these things... starting with
their
members??? <g>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Paul G. wrote:
> Didn't he just dump around 35k for the vehicle to start with?
> He seems to be better off than most of the EV racers.
>
> Sorry, but that bothered me because the cost of a vehicle is the cost
> of the complete vehicle (conversion costs for EVs aren't magically
> separate.)
I'm sure opinions will vary, but mine is that it is fairest to compare
based on the amount invested in *modifying* the chosen vehicle. John
took a bone stock Datsun 1200 and about $17K later has White Zombie;
starting with a lower-cost donor certainly keeps the total invested
lower, but it doesn't alter the fact that it took about $17K in
modifications to get the Datsun 1200 to its present level of performance
as an electric.
It seems to me that John agrees with this as he made a point of
describing his investment in the the Zombie and its performance relative
to "muscle car guys and import tuners that have poured $25,000+ into
their machines".
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey all you EV people out there 8^)
I'll confess to about 20 of those clicks but that
amount says it being viewed by average people so way
cool, it has to make you feel pretty good.
I just tossed Bill some pics of the resulting damage
from that video. The real reason I wanted to chime in
here was the Hot Rod article that talked about the
video and it ending with the destruction of the
motors. Actually there is surprisingly little damage
for the most part and generaly in the brush rigging.
I'm hoping that the Nomex spring shields will protect
them from Bills bad batteies. Being this is the first
full motor I've seen of Bill's it's given me some
additional insight into where the weak areas are
concerning insulation. One way or another we'll get
picters up and you can see where the field insulation
has been burnt by the arcing, shows just how hot that
arc is but the expensive parts, the arm and coils are
untouched.
BTW Bill it takes me longer to put pics up because I
add captions, and I chicken peck LMAO!
And then people like Brian Hall call me telling me
that UPS broke a motor he'd shipped and for me to drop
everything and fix it up NOW! I said yes sir Mr.
President I'll just drop KillaCycle, and Lawless'
motor and jump right on that, LMAO!! I got that
sucker out same day!
I'm banking on it's not what you know but who hehehe!
Anyway When I finish will KillaMotor I'll do a
detailed post for all you sicko's looking for blood
and guts and molten metal.
Fun stuff for a motor dork 8^)
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
PS: I see you made some niffty shields also, looks
like you'll be pretty set for your next meet.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
HI-
John, you are rich. Maybe not with stacks of money,but in all the ways that
count.
FT.
> [Original Message]
> From: John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Date: 2/28/2007 7:26:33 AM
> Subject: Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
>
> Hello to All,
>
> You gotta admit, Jack's entertaining!
>
> Jack Murray wrote:
>
> > I wondered early on the list "are EV's just a rich man's hobby?"
> > Well racing them certainly is.
>
> Wow, I woke up this morning and found out I was a rich guy! Hmmm...just
> wrote another check to Portland State university for my daughter's last
> term....hmmmm...scraped up enough cash to pay for T-shirts...hmmm...just
> finished paying for metal shop materials, lugs and
> connectors....hmmm....had enough to take my wife out for two-for-Tuesday
> El Indio Mexican food ($11.95 for two entrees) last night, and I 'think'
> I've got enough left over for a burger or two until my next
> paycheck...yup, I'm rich!
>
>
> > oh please, racing is always about the money and the ego....
>
>
> I just drained my 'EV play' account down and I let another guy drive my
> car while I watch from the stands....yeah Jack, you're right, it's all
> about money and ego.
>
> See Ya......John 'rich guy' Wayland
>
> PS: Without sponsorship of any kind, anyone could reproduce White Zombie
> for about $18,000 and go out and kick $75,000 production car
> butt....just ask Car and Driver (and all those muscle car guys and
> import tuners that have poured $25,000+ into their machines, only to get
> blown away by a battery powered 35 year old electric Datsun).
>
>
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
And that doesn't include the many dozens of volunteer hours and sponsorships
involved including a new battery pack sponsored each year. Add it up and if
you had to pay for it all, racing is indeed not cheap if you want
performance.
> It seems to me that John agrees with this as he made a point of
> describing his investment in the the Zombie and its performance relative
> to "muscle car guys and import tuners that have poured $25,000+ into
> their machines".
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Junior Johnson said it best:
"The way to make a small fortune in racing is to begin with a large fortune."
Bill Dube'
At 07:30 PM 2/28/2007, you wrote:
HI-
John, you are rich. Maybe not with stacks of money,but in all the ways that
count.
FT.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm sure the A123's are not cheap. Could you give us a flavor for the cost
of 800 batteries?
Thanks,
Chris Dreike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dube" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: A few new KillaCycle photos (battery assembly)
The original pack is doing fine. We can't tell the difference from when it
was brand new. All 880 cells are still at full capacity. These cells are
like "Mr Fusion" in the movie "Back to the Future".
A123 M1 cells have a 10,000 cycle life under modest discharge at room
temperature to 50% remaining capacity, not just a mere "1000 cycles."
At the elevated temperatures we are running, with the high-rate
discharges, we wouldn't expect the full 10,000 cycles, but we would not be
surprised by 1,000 cycles. That would be about five years of bracket
racing here in Colorado.
We are building a new pack for three reasons:
1) We want more HP, so the new pack is 9 cells wide instead of just 8
cells wide. Should be able to put out 1500 amps instead of "just" 1350
amps.
2) We want to have a spare pack. We can then push the pack harder than we
dared before, knowing we have a back-up if we break something.
3) We want to install heaters to temperature-control the pack. We get
maximum power at 70 to 75 C. Without heaters, we could not hold the pack
at optimal temperature between runs if there was any delay.
Bill Dube'
Dennis (T.M.) wrote:
Bill,With 123s 1000 cycle life, Why are you building a new pack?How many
cycles did you get? D.Berube
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/705 - Release Date: 2/27/2007
3:24 PM
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am wondering about weight distribution in a pickup truck
conversion. Is it as crucial to mimic the ice weight distribution as
you would in a car or do most people center the weight towards the
back more because the truck can handle it?
Is there a general way this is done in a pickup or is it something
that different people have done and do differently?
Any thoughts would be helpful.
Thanks,
Tehben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rod, you're perhaps the most qualifying to answer, but
Bill Dennis John or others who know, please chime in:
I want to ask about classifying EVs for any
competition in general and [drag] racing in particular.
As I understand currently among some other dividing in classes
parameters main one is traction battery voltage.
My question is: is it battery itself voltage or the
voltage applied to the drive system?
Consider: If I have powerful 480V battery I
can reconfigure it to, say, 48V one still retaining
its total power (10x amps).
Now I DC-DC it back to 480VDC and apply that to the drive
to get obvious advantage of 480V performance. Am I
still considered to be in 48V class because I truly have
48V battery?
I'm not sure if competing with such config providing real 480V
performance with any "normal" 48V-straight-to-the-controller
systems is very fair.
Scenario 2: I have only 200V battery and charge 200V worth of
ultracaps with isolated DC-DC. Ulsracaps are in series
with main 200V pack, so my system is seeing 400V most of the way
down the track. Caps are not considered battery, (I could
use powerful isolated DC-DC to add its output to the battery
itself, no caps). Am I still in 200V class?
Any thoughts on this and rules in place?
Thanks for insight,
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am wondering about weight distribution in a pickup truck
> conversion. Is it as crucial to mimic the ice weight
> distribution as you would in a car or do most people center
> the weight towards the back more because the truck can handle it?
Ideally you'd want to maintain the same front to back weight ratio,
but reality dictates this won't happen. If you're going to install
enough batteries to have any useful amount of range, you're going
to be stuffing them in every available spot no matter where it is.
My S-10 started out at 30-70 and ended up around 50-50 when it
was done. It works out that whatever handling is diminished by
the change in weight ratio is swamped out by the additional half
ton of weight you're adding. You've got a 4000+ pound lead turd that
isn't going to handle all that great no matter what. Additionally,
even if you could arrange the batteries to maintain the stock ratio,
the rear axle, springs and tires would be grossly overloaded.
'nother words, put everything in, and live with what you get.
Mark "EV Basher" Brueggemann
Albuquerque, NM
S-10 EV
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, I followed the US battery recommendations for
charging my pack. I set the voltage for 2.583 Volts
per cell, plus .0028V per cell per degree above 80F,
and Minus .0028V per degree below 80F. I generally
started the charge at ~20 amps, after the voltage was
reached the current would taper to ~5 amps and shut
off after ~1 hour. I ran light cycles on the pack and
I programmed the voltage limit to 130V and the current
limit to 350, but seldom went over 250.
What do I need to do different to make a new pack
last longer? I'm supposed to kill my first pack,
apparently it's dead. I'm trying to figure out how I
killed it and what I can do to prevent the same thing
happening to a replacement pack. Would a set of zener
regs have helped? I was under the impression I could
get away with an occasional equalization charge. The
wet cells would use a little more water, refill and
all is well.
TiM
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Feb 28, 2007, at 4:15 PM, Daniel Eyk wrote:
Does anyone know if Air Lab Corp is producing the NMIH
battery systems yet?
The last we heard from Ed Ang on the list he was only going to sell the
GAIA I battery systems to OEMs and not to hobbyists.
However, while looking for his web site just now, I stumbled across a
page on the "Electric Cars are for Girls" website that says the author
had recently spoken to Ed and he was reconsidering his decision, and if
you want some NiMH batteries to drop him a line and ask about it. The
page was dated Feb. 8, 2007.
<http://www.electric-cars-are-for-girls.com/Charge_On-zenn-of-
batteries.html>
I read about them in EAA's
Current Events and am interested in them. Dan Eyk
AIR Lab's website is here:
<http://www.airlabcorp.com/>
Contact info is there if you want to email Ed and ask if he will sell
you some product.
Let us know what you find out!
--
Doug Weathers
Las Cruces, NM, USA
http://www.gdunge.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Dennis, I first want to thank you very much for the very special
compliment. Concerning Junior Electric Dragsters racing against electrics, I
would have assumed that in the last several years you would have had the
opportunity to express your disapproval with the original NHRA ruling to
have electric junior dragsters race against only electrics and not head to
head with the gas boys since you have been directly involved with the rules
committees. It seems logical that you would have the ruling changed just
like you did with the ruling for sealed/vented nicad batteries which all of
us in the real world know do not exist . You however convinced a multi
million dollar corporation, the NHRA, that they do in fact exist and got
them to put them in their rule book. Do you actually realize how foolish you
made them look as a corporation. Maybe they have not yet noticed it but they
will. They are not totally fu*king idiots so I would assume at one point one
of their technical people with half a brain cell would say "what the
F**k!!!. When this whole crap actually comes down it will be very bad for
all electric racers and for EVs.
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: EV vs. ICE (was: Re: May issue of Car and Driver confirmed)
In a message dated 2/28/07 3:59:35 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<
Your video clip shows me a very interesting (!) first 1/8th mile, but I
have to stand by my statement that the last 1/8th mile can be
surprisingly boring for spectators.
I haven't made it every year, but I've been to Woodburn a few times, and
experienced this myself; out to about the 1/8th mile it is quite
exciting, but after that the cars are far enough from the stands that it
is very difficult to tell how close the cars are (or if they are even
close), and it seems like an eternity waiting for the cars to go through
the traps and the results to appear on the screens/signs.
Now, throw an ICE in one lane and suddenly there is a frame of reference
against which spectators can appreciate just what the EV is doing. The
most exciting races for me have included those of the Maniac Mazda vs a
Viper, both because the Viper provided audible cues allowing an
appreciation of the speed, etc. (the silence of an EV makes it seem like
it is effortlessly running down the track, while the sound of the ICE
trying to keep up off the line reveals just how quick the EV is really
moving), and because the Viper and MM were closely enough matched that
it wasn't really certain which would win. The EV is immediately a
length or two ahead off the line, but the ICE reels it back in over the
last 1/8th making for quite an exciting race. I think the most exciting
of these was when a shower of sparks/plasma came out under the MM
(during a shift?) somewhere between the 60ft and 1/8th mile marks... ;^>
Perhaps a race between equally well-matched 11-second Evs would prove
just as exciting to watch; unfortunately I don't think there's ever been
a pair of similar class 11-second Evs available to go head-to-head...
Watching a pair of equally matched 120V conversions take 18-25s to go
through the traps just isn't ever going to get the spectators on their
feet ;^>
**J.Wayland had egged me on a good part of last year to race HEADS UP so
Roger if he will put the Zombie next to my S10(we are both in the same
nedra
class) at a Nedra race this year you will see 2 11sec evs go head to
head.Looking
foward to racing John W.HEADS UP. Dennis Berube s10 out of the paint
booth
next tuesday.
I'm disappointed the electric Jr Dragsters haven't taken off, and that
they aren't allowed to run against the ICEs. I think the 1/8th mile
format is more engaging for the spectators and that the EVs would be
very (maybe too) competitive and their silence and simplicity might just
result in them becoming a very popular alternative for the present ICE
racers.
Cheers,
Roger.
>>
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.4/705 - Release Date: 2/27/2007
3:24 PM
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My truck http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/756
Mitsubishi MightyMax original weight was 3080# with
1840# Front / 1240# Rear or
60%/40% Front/Rear.
Now it is:
4,060 Pounds (1,845 Kilograms)
1720# Front / 2340# Rear.
Thats a 42%/58% split, front/Rear.
If you think about it a truck is designed to handle quite a bit of extra
weight. You realize this more in the ice and snow when
you have no weight in the bed. It gets really squirrely and has no traction.
With the 1100 lbs in the bed it handles just like a
car on both ice and dry pavement. The only thing I could do better to the
weight distribution is lower it down between the frame
rails. It doesn't really lean to much now in turns, I figure with the weight
12" lower it would be like driving on rails. Anyone
driving with them below te bed comment on how the truck handles roll?
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tehben Dean
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:02 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
>
>
> I am wondering about weight distribution in a pickup truck
> conversion. Is it as crucial to mimic the ice weight distribution as
> you would in a car or do most people center the weight towards the
> back more because the truck can handle it?
> Is there a general way this is done in a pickup or is it something
> that different people have done and do differently?
>
> Any thoughts would be helpful.
>
> Thanks,
> Tehben
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All.
Roger Stockton wrote:
John
took a bone stock Datsun 1200 and about $17K later has White Zombie
It seems to me that John agrees with this as he made a point of
describing his investment in the the Zombie and its performance relative
to "muscle car guys and import tuners that have poured $25,000+ into
their machines".
Roger, you have a flawed argument, in that you call the $17k I
mentioned, 'performance mods.', when that's really not accurate. What I
said was, "about $18k to reproduce it." If you are 'only' considering
the dollars invested to increase the performance over your friend's
stock diesel truck's regular performance (and don't include the cost of
the stock vehicle) on one side of the argument, it is unfair to then
consider the 'entire cost' that has been put into White Zombie, then
label all that cost, 'cost of performance mods'. My point...a regular
conversion of White Zombie would be, say a 156V system, with 13 Optimas,
a Z1K, and the tranny and clutch. That's about $8-$9k including adapter
costs, metal work for battery boxes, etc. This is what a non-performance
type White Zombie would be. Now, subtract that $9k from $18k and it
leaves $9k in 'mods' to raise the performance level to where it's at.
That's a far cry from $17-$18k!
Additionally, as those who come watch Tim and I race will attest to,
many, many of the cars we race against and beat, are gutted shells with
full racing slicks, super built motors, etc. Several hot Honda guys that
we beat often, have gutted cars with $25k dumped into them. Same goes
for some of the classic muscle car guys, too. We show up with about $9k
in performance mods (over a stock EV conversion)
and without the benefit of 60+ years of ICE racing and hotrod
performance parts availability, clean their clocks with about half the
dollar investment, using a technology that's in its infancy. And, for
those who either aren't into or can't build-up their own machines, the
only way to get Zombie type gas performance, is to spend at a minimum,
$35,000 and buy a factory made new vehicle!!! That buys you gassers that
do 12.9 to 13.4 or so, still nearly a full second slower than WZ. And
let's not forget, none of these run as squeaky clean as an EV does, and
all of them are still dependent on foreign oil.
I had to laugh when you called my 1200 a 'purpose-built drag racer,
stripped to a minimum of creature comforts, etc.' Let's look at this:
Stock 1200s had no carpets...White Zombie has full carpets that I added.
Stock 1200s never came with sunroofs...I added that, too. The car still
has its original door panels, original headliner (a little more crispy
than stock), original dash, original glass all around, original bumpers
and body panels, functioning lights, wipers, horn, etc. If it were a
purpose-built drag racer, it would have paper thin doors minus all
braces, no interior, no bumpers, thin Lexan windows, a tubbed rear,
etc., etc. It does have lighter seats. It doesn't have a radio, but
neither did the stock 1200. The back seat is gone, but that was done to
make room for batteries, the same as many stock conversions not set up
for racing at all. You call that purpose-built stripped to a minimum?
Compared to a stock 1200, my car should be called 'luxurious', what with
its sunroof and full carpets :-) Compared to any 1200s that are still on
the road, mine with its factory door panels in such great shape,
non-cracked dash, clean carpets, and near pristine glass all around,
doesn't look anything like a purpose-built stripped racer. When I hear
comments like this, it gets my hackles up, because I've strived to do
the opposite all these years. Our recent work at lightening the car has
been focused on things like lighter, more cleverly done metal brackets,
lighter battery compartments, and lighter drive train components. Note
that we have not removed the carpets, nor the door panels, nor anything
else that takes away from its stock demeanor. In fact, I'll probably be
fixing up the interior more this summer, and plan for a new headliner,
and who knows, maybe even some tunes.
As to being that purpose built race car....the only reason I don't drive
it a lot more than I do, is that my wife knows just how insanely quick
it is, and she knows what I'm likely do behind the wheel. Now, with its
840 lbs. of new batteries on board (a little more than 1/3 total vehicle
weight), I suspect this under-2400 lb. car could go 40-50 miles on a
charge...hardly the kind of range a purpose-built racing EV normally gets.
See Ya.....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roll? What roll?
I can get through a tight corner at speed and the ONLY thing I am
concerned about is when the tires will break traction and send me spinning.
(I have 50 PSI in the tires now, before I had them at 35 PSI as specified
on the sidewall and I rolled over the sidewall in fast curves.)
Having 1800 lbs lead between the frame rails make you ride like,
well - on rails.
BTW, the weight distribution is about 47/53, see:
http://evalbum.com/694
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Willmon
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:16 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
My truck http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/756
Mitsubishi MightyMax original weight was 3080# with 1840# Front / 1240# Rear
or 60%/40% Front/Rear.
Now it is:
4,060 Pounds (1,845 Kilograms)
1720# Front / 2340# Rear.
Thats a 42%/58% split, front/Rear.
If you think about it a truck is designed to handle quite a bit of extra
weight. You realize this more in the ice and snow when you have no weight
in the bed. It gets really squirrely and has no traction. With the 1100
lbs in the bed it handles just like a car on both ice and dry pavement. The
only thing I could do better to the weight distribution is lower it down
between the frame rails. It doesn't really lean to much now in turns, I
figure with the weight 12" lower it would be like driving on rails. Anyone
driving with them below te bed comment on how the truck handles roll?
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tehben Dean
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:02 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
>
>
> I am wondering about weight distribution in a pickup truck conversion.
> Is it as crucial to mimic the ice weight distribution as you would in
> a car or do most people center the weight towards the back more
> because the truck can handle it?
> Is there a general way this is done in a pickup or is it something
> that different people have done and do differently?
>
> Any thoughts would be helpful.
>
> Thanks,
> Tehben
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>Mark "EV Basher" Brueggemann wrote:
>
> .....Additionally, even if you could arrange the batteries to maintain
> the stock ratio, the rear axle, springs and tires would be
> grossly overloaded.....
>
I think if you maintained the stock F/R ratio the front end would be the side
that gets overloaded. Mine was originally a 60/40
front/rear. If I had 1840 lbs front and 1240 lbs rear to start with and I add
660 lbs to the front and 440 lbs to the rear the
front end would be the one suffering. As it turns out how I did it, the front
end actually lost 120 lbs of weight. And even my
armstrong power steering is pleasant to drive.
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Tehben,
For most pickups it is really simple:
- consider the curb weight before conversion,
- discount for the ICE parts removed
- add motor and controller weight
- now check how much difference with GVWR you have
- most likely you will have close to this in batteries,
so to stay within front/rear axle weight specs, you often
need to load more towards the back.
This is logical for a pickup, the weight is usually mostly over
the rear axle, except the people in the cabin.
Placing the batteries between the frame rails under the bed
is usually the optimal position for weight distribution.
Starting with the batteries in the bed allows a shorter
conversion time and is often OK in weight distribution.
Success,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tehben Dean
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:02 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Weight Distribution for Pickup Trucks
I am wondering about weight distribution in a pickup truck conversion. Is it
as crucial to mimic the ice weight distribution as you would in a car or do
most people center the weight towards the back more because the truck can
handle it?
Is there a general way this is done in a pickup or is it something that
different people have done and do differently?
Any thoughts would be helpful.
Thanks,
Tehben
--- End Message ---
