Send EV mailing list submissions to

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

You can reach the person managing the list at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of EV digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: A123 M1 Capacity question (Peter Gabrielsson)
   2. Re: Adding ceramic heater to Cabriolet (Deanne Mott)
   3. Re: The Detalidon Commuter EV Chasis Design (Morgan LaMoore)
   4. Oops and what to do now -- almost the EV grin, but not quite!
      (Brian Staffanson)
   5. Re: EMI; NOT! (Dan Frederiksen)


Message: 1
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 11:16:55 -0700
From: "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EVDL] A123 M1 Capacity question
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

See reply below

> No, it stores coulombs *and* energy. Storing a charge at a voltage is
> equivalent to storing energy.

Yes, this is correct.

> Consider these two packs:
> 90Ah at 12V
> 90Ah at 288V
> They both have the same amp-hours, so according to you they have the same
> capacity. One stores 24 times more energy, though, so it'll get about 24
> times more range (minus extra power consumed by accelerating the extra
> weight).

No, that's not what I said. I was merely explaining why battery
capacity is given in coulombs.

> And the energy stored in the battery is constant. More of the energy is
> wasted as heat if you use more current, but that doesn't change the amount
> of energy stored in the battery.

True, that is why I said "the amount of energy you can get out of a battery".

> -Morgan LaMoore
> On 9/24/07, Peter Gabrielsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > No Dan, what it stores is coulombs (Ah) just like a water tank stores
> > water molecules. The amount of energy you can get out of a battery
> > dependent on the rate at which you extract it and so is not a suitable
> > indicator of capacity.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see



Message: 2
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:26:39 -0400
From: "Deanne Mott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Adding ceramic heater to Cabriolet
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Well, now I'm rethinking about using the water heater instead of
ceramic.  The car came with one, but it leaked all over the place so
we took it out.  Since I don't like to work on cars, and short on time
to do it even if I did, I was going to pay someone else to do the
under-dash work.  Maybe the $600 to replace the Russco would end up
being less expensive.  It's not that cold here in piedmont NC so I can
stand to wait for it to heat up.  I use a cover on the car which
removes most of the defrost problems.

Thanks for all the advice - lots of good stuff here....

On 9/24/07, Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I have EV water haters for the job, but this is rather OEM solution.
> Despite the ROYAL PITA fact as you put it, ceramic heater
> is $15 at Wal-mart, too tempting. Liquid heater is $600-700.
> (ceramic one requires some parts around it to make it work
> reliably, but all hardware may still be well under $100).
> It's how much your time really worth. Many who have done
> stock core removal would gladly pay twice as much as liquid
> heater cost not to do it again, but other's have hard time
> taking their word for it. $15 is so tempting. So more often than not
> people who has plenty of time/skill but can't justify the money,
> don't mind taking half car apart. This also gets the job done.


Message: 3
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:35:36 -0500
From: "Morgan LaMoore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EVDL] The Detalidon Commuter EV Chasis Design
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Do you have technical drawings of the frame? If I want to build my
own, do you have schematics I can download to do it myself?

-Morgan LaMoore

On 9/24/07, Arak Leatham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Arak Leatham - Web and Desktop Systems Developer


Message: 4
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:38:06 -0600
From: "Brian Staffanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [EVDL] Oops and what to do now -- almost the EV grin, but not
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

So I am finally putting in the 6V Deka GC15 in my car, and cabling it all
up, and being a little careless, as I "know" exactly what I am doing.  My
wife comes to ask me a question, and then "oh no, your car is on fire." from
my wife.  I run to the car, and see that one cable shorted on the negative,
hit the positive, and melted the terminals on both the positive and negative
side.  The terminal is Offset post w/ vertical stainless steel 5/16" stud
and hex nut.  Here is a picture of what it looks like:

So my question is two fold.  Can I fix the terminals?  Or do I just need to
replace the battery?  I remember some conversation in times past about
terminals not be good enough for ev use.  Are these good enough?  Or did I
waste my money on these batteries.



Message: 5
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:40:39 +0200
From: Dan Frederiksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EMI; NOT!
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

sounds good (pun intended :)
maybe you can make a brief webpage with this text and some pictures of 
how you did it


Mark Hanson wrote:

>Since everything works on my E-Porsche, I decided it's time to play with pesky 
>EMI.  I get really cranky if I can't hear NPR, news, Terry Grose, Car Talk, 
>Garrison Kheilor, Wait,wait don't tell me etc., and I live out in the sticks 
>(Blue Ridge Mountains) between the Appalachian Trail & Blue-Ridge Parkway.  So 
>EMI must be vertually non-existant (like when the EV is off).  
>I ran the main controller cables down the left side metal enclosed channel of 
>the 914 (74') E-Porsche and all control signals down the right side and 
>through the center tunnel as the original conversion.  I still had trouble 
>picking up the weaker NPR talk channel with terry gross at lunch (that I 
>listen to while getting E-parts around town).  By turning off each DC 
>converter in sequence I could identify the worst culprits (while on the weak 
>station).  (I  have 2 dc-dc converters for reliability, one set to 14V and a 
>backup to 13.8V).  I found that the original DC converter VP-12124 that I 
>designed for had proper inpu and output PI filters but the back 
>up Lambda didn't.  I put a standard pi-filter on from where 
>the HV line comes in (a 2mH balun with .22uf X-cap & twin .0047uf Y-caps to RF 
>frame ground reference).  I also put a high current 1Mh 12A balun choke on the 
>output for common mode RF.  This got rid of the EMI from the DC converter.
>There was still EMI present, I could tell while the radio was on and the 
>ignition key was switched on & off.  It was my dash display uP controlled 
>battery charger and run monitor (displays volts, RPM's Temp etc.)  This thing 
>has a scanning display and an internal oscillating dc-dc converter *and* is 
>mounted in the dash next to the radio, oops.  Since it's main function is for 
>charge control, rather than choke-treat the umpteen wires coming out of it for 
>conducted EMI and a shielded box for radiated, I decided to just put a "NPR 
>switch" on it to turn it off while I'm listening to the FM.  Now I can't tell 
>when the car is on or not, I get the *same* good reception (and no 
>interference from the traction control with a 200uH choke in series and 
>channeled cables).  That's right, no difference whether the ignition key is on 
>or off, same reception on faint stations.  (Don't listen to AM though but it 
>appears ok).
>Have a renewable energy day,
>Mark in Roanoke, VA
>Capture your memories in an online journal!
>For subscription options, see


For subscription options, see

End of EV Digest, Vol 2, Issue 60

Reply via email to