What's new

Different types of EV configurations

Is the EV goal for performance, silent running, or novelty at the moment?
Yes.

Just depends who you ask. Hyper cars are pushing performance. People that actually buy electric vehicles or hear them going down the road realize they aren't noise-less. For everyday driving and normal road operating speeds, most IC engines can be toned to put out comparable noise levels. A lot of people push for it because they don't look beyond and the car and assume it is friendlier to the environment, there are many reasons it is not. Could it be? Maybe someday. Not with where were are at in tech. currently. There again, we're in the lower zones of necessary CO2 for our planets to grow and produce. We have room for higher CO2 levels, not less, before nature starts to become stagnant and then dwindle.
 
The battery is definitely the primary double edged sword of it all. On a sliding scale, how much space are people willing to give up for capacity?

I agree about it being novelty so far. But the potential performance of an electric crawler is undeniable. Just have to give up range.

Those are the biggest trade offs and in what situation.
Family trip: more capacity to drive further, less storage space (vehicle dependent) and at what point is the weight of the batteries hindering economy vs. helping?

Truck pulling a trailer: Need large motor(s). Need lots of battery capacity to drive those motors. It doesn't math out for standard truck sizes pulling just about an trailer currently unless you are making a trip of 100 miles or less, or willing to stop and charge every 100-150 miles for a charge. You in the hills to camp? Better lessen that range.

Just going back and forth to work, trips around town, visit family: Current EVs are practical as long as charge costs out weigh your preferred IC fuel. Currents ICEs don't have much more room to grow in MPGs without huge sacrafices to capability. EV Battery, motor, and components still have the potential to gain in efficiency, weight savings, and charge capability. And also use metals that are more readily available or aren't 1,000 years off from being able to mine enough to cover just the total number of vehicles we have on the road now. Though, it seems that would be part of the plan. Less driving over all and less singular vehicle ownership (this can have a separate thread).

Can get more into trade offs with racing and off roading later.
 
Yes.

Just depends who you ask. Hyper cars are pushing performance. People that actually buy electric vehicles or hear them going down the road realize they aren't noise-less. For everyday driving and normal road operating speeds, most IC engines can be toned to put out comparable noise levels. A lot of people push for it because they don't look beyond and the car and assume it is friendlier to the environment, there are many reasons it is not. Could it be? Maybe someday. Not with where were are at in tech. currently. There again, we're in the lower zones of necessary CO2 for our planets to grow and produce. We have room for higher CO2 levels, not less, before nature starts to become stagnant and then dwindle.

Those are the biggest trade offs and in what situation.
Family trip: more capacity to drive further, less storage space (vehicle dependent) and at what point is the weight of the batteries hindering economy vs. helping?

Truck pulling a trailer: Need large motor(s). Need lots of battery capacity to drive those motors. It doesn't math out for standard truck sizes pulling just about an trailer currently unless you are making a trip of 100 miles or less, or willing to stop and charge every 100-150 miles for a charge. You in the hills to camp? Better lessen that range.

Just going back and forth to work, trips around town, visit family: Current EVs are practical as long as charge costs out weigh your preferred IC fuel. Currents ICEs don't have much more room to grow in MPGs without huge sacrafices to capability. EV Battery, motor, and components still have the potential to gain in efficiency, weight savings, and charge capability. And also use metals that are more readily available or aren't 1,000 years off from being able to mine enough to cover just the total number of vehicles we have on the road now. Though, it seems that would be part of the plan. Less driving over all and less singular vehicle ownership (this can have a separate thread).

Can get more into trade offs with racing and off roading later.
I believe we were referring to offroad EVs not street and towing use. Capacity trading off , spare parts, more beers in the cooler, the girlfriend, etc.

ICE still has room to grow. The gov won't let it. Too many safety and emissions standards drove up size, weight, and waste energy.
 
I believe we were referring to offroad EVs not street and towing use. Capacity trading off , spare parts, more beers in the cooler, the girlfriend, etc.

ICE still has room to grow. The gov won't let it. Too many safety and emissions standards drove up size, weight, and waste energy.
Yep. Getting to that, some of my previous post will tie into off road use. Probably long winded stuff that I could have wrapped into cliffs, but there we are. Off road application to come...
 
I don't like the Jeep $xe platform. Seem dumb in how they have the 2 systems working, unless something has changed. The Toyota/Honda style systems seem to be far superior.
 
How does regenerative braking factor into a system where just the engine has been replaced by a motor?

Obviously it wouldn't work with a slushbox, but are there going to be weak points driving the motor from the wheels, on downhill parts, to put power back in the battery?

Numbers vary, but regenerative braking can extend range a fair bit (60%ish)
 
Numbers vary, but regenerative braking can extend range a fair bit (60%ish)
You can make regen extend the range by 60% on an EV ?
Send me your resume, I got a job with a big fat paycheck for you.

I don't like the Jeep $xe platform. Seem dumb in how they have the 2 systems working, unless something has changed. The Toyota/Honda style systems seem to be far superior.
Retrofit vs purpose built.
I'm glad Jeep didn't engineer the Wrangler as a hybrid from the start. Would be an even bigger POS than what it is now.
 
How does regenerative braking factor into a system where just the engine has been replaced by a motor?

Obviously it wouldn't work with a slushbox, but are there going to be weak points driving the motor from the wheels, on downhill parts, to put power back in the battery?

Numbers vary, but regenerative braking can extend range a fair bit (60%ish)

The early regenerative braking systems were basically just a switch that turns the motors into generators when being force driven the oposite direction. No idea how modern systems work.
 
Retrofit vs purpose built.
I'm glad Jeep didn't engineer the Wrangler as a hybrid from the start. Would be an even bigger POS than what it is now.
The way they did it there is no point. It uses the battery until it's really low and then goes to the engine. I guess you can go into a mode that uses the engine to chargge the battery but it does so via a big generator hooked to the engine. If they did a hybrid like Toyota, Porsche, Honda I'd buy one for awhile. Otherwise I have no interest in their hybrid setup and will keep looking for a petral version.
 
The early regenerative braking systems were basically just a switch that turns the motors into generators when being force driven the oposite direction. No idea how modern systems work.

What I'm meaning is, on a regular rig, when you coast, the engine isn't really being driven, it's just sort of holding back the drivetrain. However in a regenerative braking scenario, the wheels are turning the whole drivetrain, back to the motor, and pushing it round, how does that work, with different types of lockers and so on, is it even feasible for things like posi-drives and those clicky ratchet ones, whose name refuses to come to my elderly brain. Would there be weak points when pushing the drivetrain hard from the opposite end as the forces would be different than say spinning the wheels round on a vehicle with the wheels jacked off the ground.
 
What I'm meaning is, on a regular rig, when you coast, the engine isn't really being driven, it's just sort of holding back the drivetrain. However in a regenerative braking scenario, the wheels are turning the whole drivetrain, back to the motor, and pushing it round, how does that work, with different types of lockers and so on,

Regen and engine braking apply forces the exact same way on a drivetrain.
 
What dictates the "ideal" configuration? Is it a simple matter of packaging and quickness of fabrication?

In the case of a 4wd, does the electric motor need all the axle and transmission gearing? My general understanding is there isn't a min RPM for the electric motor nor is there an 'off idle lag'.

My interest is potential conversion on an old Civic without a drivetrain.
 
What dictates the "ideal" configuration? Is it a simple matter of packaging and quickness of fabrication?
Ideal is 1 motor per wheel. From a practical standpoint, packaging, easy of fab, cost. The normal things that an engine swap would have.
In the case of a 4wd, does the electric motor need all the axle and transmission gearing? My general understanding is there isn't a min RPM for the electric motor nor is there an 'off idle lag'.

My interest is potential conversion on an old Civic without a drivetrain.
No lag or minimum rpm. Axle and transmission gearing depend on the motor and platform. More expensive, more powerful motors, like Tesla's can get away with a fixed ratio. The warp 9 style conversions that used to be the more common approach need a transmission.
 
I would be interested in doing a straight “engine swap” conversion in front of a manual transmission to an electric motor for a trail rig, how Jeep did with their Magneto concepts. Listening to Jeep talk about it, it sounds like a really cool experience to wheel an electric manual.

I know nothing about where to even start, other than vaguely knowing that one guy who did a 4Runner in U4 at KoH used a wrecked Nissan Leaf I believe.

If the cost was roughly around the price of, say an R2.8 swap or decently sorted TDI swap into my XJ I would strongly consider it. I guess it would need enough range to run the Rubicon or other several day wheeling trips. Maybe a small Honda portable generator becomes the new 5 gal spare fuel, topping off for a couple hours once you get to a campsite.

The draw for me I think is primarily novelty, but second it seems like it could be potentially simpler in some ways for a trail rig. Then again I don’t know what I don’t know. The noise aspect is cool, and the unique driving style with a much different torque curve coupled to a manual transmission seems like fun.

Could it gain space too? What’s an electric motor that’s roughly comparable to the driving characteristics of a 4.0 going to be sized like? Could the engine bay become a small frunk too? If the motor is connected to the bell housing and low enough, could it leave space for a tray above it to become storage?

What are the sizes of battery packs, can they fit like a skid plate with traditional drive shafts configurations to keep LCG or would they need to go above the floorboard likely?

Is the Nissan Leaf the go to for junkyard conversions? I assume there’s a premium on Tesla at junkyards.
 
I would be interested in doing a straight “engine swap” conversion in front of a manual transmission to an electric motor for a trail rig, how Jeep did with their Magneto concepts. Listening to Jeep talk about it, it sounds like a really cool experience to wheel an electric manual.

Tipover (old board) did that on a samy 15+ years ago
 
How does regenerative braking factor into a system where just the engine has been replaced by a motor?

Obviously it wouldn't work with a slushbox, but are there going to be weak points driving the motor from the wheels, on downhill parts, to put power back in the battery?

Numbers vary, but regenerative braking can extend range a fair bit (60%ish)
Regen works awesome on the #1 style EV conversion. On the street it just feels like engine braking in 2nd gear ish and you can come all the way to a stop, except it works at any speed. On my truck I have the OEM t-case and in low range the regen is extremely strong. I can adjust it between 3 settings and usually only use the 3rd for extreme downhill descents (going down to Hell's Gate and Wipe Out Hill etc) but use the other 2 settings depending on trail conditions.

One weird thing that you hit on is that the electric motor is working against the forward motion, whereas the tranny/engine are just putting a load on it. The regen is speed dependent and the computer controlled inverter has a feedback loop to maintain/accelerate/decelerate depending on what your throttle foot is doing. So for instance when going down really steep sand dunes in Sand Hollow in max regen with foot off the throttle, the tires would "skip" and kind of overslow then speed up then overslow again, similar to ABS. It's actually really hard to steer when it does this so I either get on the throttle ever so slightly or turn down regen if I need to steer.

Regen is worth like 10% on point-to-point range, but where it really comes in handy is going up and down in elevation. That's probably where you got the 60% number. So for instance if you go x amount of distance regen helps 10% but if you go x amount of distance and climb a mountain in the middle then regen can give you maybe 60% more range.

I have a lunchbox locker in the rear it seems to work normal.

What dictates the "ideal" configuration? Is it a simple matter of packaging and quickness of fabrication?

In the case of a 4wd, does the electric motor need all the axle and transmission gearing? My general understanding is there isn't a min RPM for the electric motor nor is there an 'off idle lag'.

My interest is potential conversion on an old Civic without a drivetrain.
Yes, electric motors definitely need gearing. Teslas, LEAFs, Rivian, etc all EVs have reduction gears. Usually the total reduction is 7:1 to 11:1 depending on the application.

Contrary to popular opinion, modern AC electric motors do not give full torque at 0RPM. They need to ramp up the RPM in order to put down the torque. Usually they are software limited. My truck will not give me full power till about 1000 RPM then it ramps up, all controlled by the inverter's logic. At low RPM in order to make lots of torque you need tons and tons of amps. All good except if there is an obstruction aka the motor is "stalled" then it will fry in a split-second, cook the magnets, etc. So at low RPMs they are limited. Gear reduction lowers the load and raises the RPM, both help out. Just like in a gas powered truck.

If you watch the Hummer EV or Rivian doing rock crawling you will see they struggle. They start to climb up the rock and then come to a stop and stall out so the driver gets more on the throttle and they either lurch up or spin the tires or just fail and can't climb it. Not elegant. TFL Trucks youtube channel has a couple good videos of the Hummer and Rivian in Moab and other trails where they really struggle to do what pretty much any 4x4 from the last 40 years could do.

They tested a Tesla Model Y and it was really apparent that just because it can do 0-60 in 3 seconds or whatever, it really can't climb over a small rock.

The only way around that is with reduction gearing. For my truck I run about 11:1 in high range and 26.5:1 in low range (that's total reduction from motor to the axles). The Rivian is 12:1 permanently and the Hummer is 13:1 front 10:1 rear permanently. Rivian patented an EV specific low-range transfer case earlier this year so they finally figured this out.
 
Last edited:
If you watch the Hummer EV or Rivian doing rock crawling you will see they struggle. They start to climb up the rock and then come to a stop and stall out so the driver gets more on the throttle and they either lurch up or spin the tires or just fail and can't climb it.
Just like any auto trans.
That's why you learn how to drive 2 footed.

TFL Trucks youtube channel [...]
Every time these guys share anything about offroad, it reminds me how little clue they have about trucks.
 
Just like any auto trans.
That's why you learn how to drive 2 footed.
Well, no. An automatic transmission has a torque converter which multiplies the torque of the engine so as you feed in more power the tires receive more torque until the converter locks up. Even if the tires are stopped hard the torque converter is building torque behind them. With an EV the torque is fixed, nothing multiplies it, i.e. more throttle doesn't help.

Driving an EV is similar to driving a manual but being unable to slip the clutch. If the RPM is too low, no go.
 
Well, no. An automatic transmission has a torque converter which multiplies the torque of the engine so as you feed in more power the tires receive more torque until the converter locks up. Even if the tires are stopped hard the torque converter is building torque behind them. With an EV the torque is fixed, nothing multiplies it, i.e. more throttle doesn't help.

Driving an EV is similar to driving a manual but being unable to slip the clutch. If the RPM is too low, no go.
So you're saying we should be putting torque converters on the electric motors?
 
Well, no. An automatic transmission has a torque converter which multiplies the torque of the engine so as you feed in more power the tires receive more torque until the converter locks up. Even if the tires are stopped hard the torque converter is building torque behind them. With an EV the torque is fixed, nothing multiplies it, i.e. more throttle doesn't help.

Driving an EV is similar to driving a manual but being unable to slip the clutch. If the RPM is too low, no go.
Have you listened to interviews with Jeep about the Magneto concept vehicle and the 6spd manual behind it? It sounds like the manual fixes the things you're talking about, but maybe they just aren't sharing the "negatives" side of the concept.
 
Have you listened to interviews with Jeep about the Magneto concept vehicle and the 6spd manual behind it? It sounds like the manual fixes the things you're talking about, but maybe they just aren't sharing the "negatives" side of the concept.
Yeah having a manual trans with lots of gears plus low range transfer case gives you a lot of options for gearing, which is what you want.


Here is an experience I read on the Rivian forum that describes the problem really well:

I've read about--and have seen the videos--Rivian's lack of slow speed crawl control. Today was the first time that I've encountered off-roading situations wherein the Rivian four motor strategy had me experiencing real challenge.

For those in the Puget Sound region, this trip was at the Reiter Pit ORV area. The trail photo below was one of many obstacles that were rough. That Jeep Rubicon handled everything with ease, being able to lock front and rear axles and, importantly, tackle obstacles with precise control.

To clear these obstacles, I had apply rapid and aggressive accelerator pedal input. Then, once the R1T made it up obstacles, the moments that followed were with an out-of-control 7000 lb. truck sorting itself out/me trying to brake and steer to regain control. The result was damage to the truck.

I wish, wish, wish that Rivian would program the Off-Road Rock Crawl setting to make the Rivian R1T and R1S perform like a Jeep. Then again, maybe that's not possible with our Quad Motor drivetrain.


In comparison to this description, my EV Land Cruiser crawls amazingly well.

 
Last edited:
Top Back Refresh