EV conversions

[FridgeFreezer]

This chap did the maths on battery size/weight/energy density:

 

[sean f]

13 hours ago, FridgeFreezer said:

@TSD had a spreadsheet that worked it out I think - it's pretty much an exponential curve the faster you go and does give the lie to some of the claims you hear in the pub about how fast people's Defenders will go

Been a long time since I did air flow dynamics calculations and then they were mostly the other way round, getting air through holes not things moving in air.

It won't be quite exponential (though similar) at a certain point the air/fluid reach's its Reynolds number and there will be a step increase (something you try and avoid in industry), at that point the air has becomes turbulent and friction significantly increases, probable at different speeds for different bit of the vehicle. With most modern cars a lot of work has gone on in wind tunnels to avoid this as far as possible and to as high a speed as possible. This is one of the reason modern cars all look pretty similar in shape and for most modern medium sized cars the most efficient speed has increased to 60-70mph ish or more depending on specific engine / car etc, the old 50mph most efficient number was more based on 70's American cars with the aerodynamics of a brick, as for an older LR's just don't go there!, generally sudden changes in shape are bad.

It is quite noticeable that on EV's this has been taken up in a big way, also the rolling resistance has been reduced as much as possible with narrow hard tyres, I am sure they comply to requirements but do wonder how the braking on some compares to similar sized conventional vehicles with "normal " sized tyres and probable a lighter road weight, I expect more technology has been used to balance it out, but does one just comply and the other significantly exceed?, would assume this sort of thing would flag in the safety tests?.

Still not convinced EV tech is there yet for it to be viable and economic on mass and the infrastructure to support it certainly isn't (guy up the road was refused a fast charge port as apparently the transformer and cables don't have enough spare capacity in the area, not likely to be cheap to upgrade), have to admit things are improving though.

[cackshifter]

14 hours ago, Ed Poore said:

Used to? What about now?

Well it was about 50 years since I studied fluid mechanics, and what with inflation, Brexit, the pandemic etc..........

[Adam001]

Cool thread, ive got a bit of experience to weigh in. i drive an EV as a daily and work on BEV construction methods.

Few key points for me:

I have put 14000 on an EV from new, charged it appropriately and seen no deteriation in range.

Driven all over the UK, and often set off on drives with no planning knowing i dont have enough charge to do it, but there's plenty of apps to support on the fly planning, although ill accept ive had a few fustrating public charger problems.

I own a 110 which we've had since 1994 and ill never sell, i've extensively modified it, got rid of land rovers rubbish engine options and swapped to BMW.

The 110 on normal sub 200mile drives costs 24 times that of the EV  this means it doesnt get driven because naturally you jump for the cheaper car.

The classic car debate is all great, but for me, making the 110 EV, makes the drive so much better and makes it a car that you dont leave sitting there. I dont buy the "its the character" im sure they thought the ford model T or whatever were the same but no one wants a brake lever now!

 

Conversion options ive looked at

Tesla model 3 rear drive unit in place of the LT230, efficiency is important and I do value power, they normally need the inverter board replaced to work standalone (openinverter.org) also the ratio will need swapping to work with our diffs

100kwh pack is a minimum, best case i estimate a 110 would get upto 2 miles per kwh, this is always going to be the sticking point

Around 60kwh of batteries will fit in the engine bay and 40kwh will go underslung in place of the fuel tank/side underfloor. Tesla model S models lend themselves to it well, but LG pattern pouch modules or VW ID.4 modules could work well

Many tesla or oem components can be reused such as contactors, pre-charge, DC/DC, and charger but normally the BMS needs to be aftermarket but items like orion BMS are good and proven

There's nothing unsafe or dodgy about the HV element if done right, we drive cars with PAS fluid under hundreds of bar and pressurised flammable fuel... the correct multi shrouded cables are available you just need to keep yourself safe while working live.

 

No idea if i would do it in a year or in 10 years, but it has to happen at some point. My 2p worth

 

[cackshifter]

The charging aspect is worth considering; I contacted Electricity North West (our friendly local distribution network) re charging points. So on a normal domestic installation here (100A, single phase) you can have one 7kW point. Otherwise it's 3 phase, esp if you want  the 22kW ones. 

But going back to why would you do it, we are just within the GManc emissions zone (postponed at the moment) But I can imagine say a tree surgeon with a 110 towing a chipper for instance  might consider (not necessarily do) it. The journeys are fairly local. He needs a bit of offroad capability. Otherwise he needs to buy a new pickup, or pay £10 a day. Most things that are hybrid or electric don't seem to be able to tow as much as the ICE equivalent. The electric Transit is not esp aerodynamic shaped and gets by with a 68kWh battery so 100kWh in a 110 doesn't seem too bad - if you don't need massive range.

[FridgeFreezer]

5 minutes ago, cackshifter said:

Most things that are hybrid or electric don't seem to be able to tow as much as the ICE equivalent.

My buddy bought an ID.4 with the long-range battery - you aren't allowed to tow with it, you aren't allowed a roof rack, and the rear seat is re-designed to stop you putting 5 people in the car because the battery is that heavy.

He's called it Ernie

[elbekko]

3 hours ago, cackshifter said:

Most things that are hybrid or electric don't seem to be able to tow as much as the ICE equivalent

That's why I ordered the GLE hybrid. Tows 3500kg as long as you option the air suspension.

[Snagger]

Adam’s post is full of useful points.  The experience of owning and driving his EV is consistent with that of the overwhelming majority of EV owners.  But it must be remembered that most EVs are designed that way from the ground up, so get the most efficiency while also packaging the systems in a way for optimised handling and passenger/load space.  Look at those factory  EVs which are shoe horned into existing platforms and they have significantly reduced range, handling and practicability.  The Min-E (EV Mini) is a good example, where its range, speed, handling and load are severely compromised compared to its cheaper EV peers.

If you own an EV and a Land Rover, of course you would use the EV for most trips.  Most of us who own a small ICE car and a Land Rover use the smaller car for most local trips too.  But for those with just the one vehicle, you have to carefully weigh the cost savings per mile of an EV over the enormous upfront cost of the conversion.  For most of us, I don’t think it will ever balance out, even if you do a lot of driving.  So, it becomes about wider issues, like how much better the drive is with that full torque over the whole speed range and the reduced vibration and noise, or about environmental concerns, especially in towns, or even due to local legislation banning certain vehicles’ use.  That price differential is much smaller when looking at buying a new car outright - the price of a new EV is significantly higher than the price of a comparable ICE vehicle, but not the £100k of a conversion like the green Defender in the video above, so the long term cost/benefit balance weighs much better for the new EV.  Not so the conversion.

The Tesla motor replacing the whole transmission is by far the most efficient option, removing as much friction and noise generating kit as possible, minimising weight and maximising space and weight capacity for batteries.  There is no debate about that.  The compromise of that conversion is cost.  Compared to the Leaf or Hyper9 conversions, it’s astronomically expensive, while the more modest ones are just cripplingly so.  So, as always, it ultimately comes down to how deep your pockets are.

[Snagger]

Coincidental timing, but I found this petition this morning pushing to have EV conversions recategorised as zero-emission vehicles like new-build EVs in the UK.  I know most of us can’t afford the conversions, but I think it’s worth signing as there is a clear double standard and also because it may help more people a little wealthier than the bulk of us to convert, bringing costs down to where some of us can afford it…

https://protect-eu.mimecast.com/s/9sZ7CXLz6I4GBZw8T65yYU?domain=petition.parliament.uk

[Retroanaconda]

This is a very interesting debate and I’m not sure anyone really knows what the EV landscape is going to look like in 5 or 10 years’ time. I’m a big fan of electric propulsion as a means for day-to-day driving, the means of storing/generating that electrical energy is less clear though. It is not currently an option for me as I simply drive too many miles to make it practical. If and when a 4x4 EV is available that will do 300+ miles on a charge in all weathers, carry/tow decent weight, and can be recharged in five minutes then it will be doable - but I would not like to guess how long that will be? I’m hoping within 9 to 10 years or so as that’s when I’ll next be looking to buy a new car.

Other societal changes may well affect how things play out. One could argue that the entire modern world has been built on a plentiful supply of cheap and seemingly consequence-free energy and if that is coming to an end things may have to change - personal transportation may well be part of that change. Between the pressure on fuels, emissions and climate change I think we may well be at or around the peak of the car as we know it.

Hopefully at some point in the future EVs (or some other technology) will become a practical solution for most and petrol and diesel will be in much less demand, meaning we can enjoy practical classics like old Land Rovers in an affordable way. Just as long as we can find a fuel station that’s still open 

[deep]

I think we hit the peak of the car as we know it thirty years ago!  The relentless move to electronic over-riding, the "deadening" of the driving experience with brakes/steering/transmission designed to remove feedback, the complexity and weight of "safety" mechanisms, straightening of roads, complex and illogical speed limits, locked gates and bollards closing off Land Rover roads (and the rise of lead-foots with big tyres and lots of revs wrecking those tracks, which led to all those closures) and who knows what else?  They say nostalgia isn't what it used to be but it's not just cheaper fuel that made motoring more pleasurable decades ago.  Common to much of this is loss of freedom and it is patently obvious that the freedom to choose what propels your vehicle is going to get seriously compromised in coming years, even though the thinking behind it all is so seriously flawed. 

[FridgeFreezer]

1 minute ago, deep said:

Common to much of this is loss of freedom and it is patently obvious that the freedom to choose what propels your vehicle is going to get seriously compromised in coming years, even though the thinking behind it all is so seriously flawed. 

I'd suggest in some ways we've never had it so good and are about to have it better... we may love old cars but modern ones are objectively miles better in nearly every way (reliable, safe, cheap, comfy) than old ones, even if they do come with a load of stuff we consider daft (but then our parents & grandparents would probably consider much of the stuff in a 20-30 year old car nonsense too)... where do you draw the line? Commuting in a Series 1?

We're approaching a future where cars can be powered by a simple, cheap, renewable source that causes waaaay less pollution, is almost silent, has incredible characteristics for powering a vehicle (100% torque from zero, 1 moving part) and is easy to drop into any number of rattly old bangers to give them not only a new lease of life but potentially make them way more practical & reliable than they ever were - and with zero emissions, the NIMBY crowd have almost no interest or leverage in telling you you can't do it, or that you shouldn't drive a fast or powerful car, or lobbying government to scrap, ban, restrict or punitively tax them.

[Snagger]

There is truth in both views.  Older cars had more character and driving was more exhilarating, but they were also far less reliable, rusted within a few years and were hard for youngsters to keep on the road with their limited resources- anyone in their late 40s will remember how different a first car was to that of people in their 20s or early 30s.  It is also important to remember that driving was a bit easier back then because there were a lot less vehicles on the roads; how many households had more than one car in the 80s?  Now look at how many have more than two.

Conversely, modern cars have so much complexity that it is difficult for owners to work on them and costly at garages, and any increase in fuel efficiency from high compression engines with high pressure fuel injection is negated by increased weight and a multitude of emission control systems that strangle the engine.  A modern four seat car is double the size of its 80s counterpart.  It’s a nuanced change, some for the better and some for the worse.

BEVs should make some of it better - quieter traffic with less fumes, easy but sporty driving, easy recharging for those with dedicated parking, and less maintenance. Better sourcing of electricity in the future may help keep energy prices, not just security, under control, and may keep motoring affordable, but there is a way to go yet. But I dread self-driving vehicles.

[FridgeFreezer]

2 hours ago, Snagger said:

Conversely, modern cars have so much complexity that it is difficult for owners to work on them and costly at garages

I dunno - £20 for an OBD scanner from eBay, google the fault and replace a £10 sensor is a pretty easy fix compared to strip & rebuild the bl**dy carb or dizzy again... service intervals are huge, engines run cleanly and efficienly for years with almost no maintenance, and the car was (in real money) cheaper and better in every way than anything previous generations could have dreamed of owning.

2 hours ago, Snagger said:

any increase in fuel efficiency from high compression engines with high pressure fuel injection is negated by increased weight and a multitude of emission control systems that strangle the engine

But it's not, is it? Modern cars are very efficient compared to old cars, and if we all drove as slowly as old cars went we'd get stellar MPG. Simple example - switching from 3.5 with carb & dizzy to 4.6 EFI in my truck roughly doubled the power AND improved the MPG, and dare I say it the reliability too.

[landroversforever]

1 hour ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Simple example - switching from 3.5 with carb & dizzy to 4.6 EFI in my truck roughly doubled the power AND improved the MPG, and dare I say it the reliability too.

You’ve jinxed it now!  

[FridgeFreezer]

35 minutes ago, landroversforever said:

You’ve jinxed it now!  

Maybe... but I've probably done about 50k on MSEFI in various trucks so even if I had a problem tomorrow it's still a good record.

[Eightpot]

as an aside, I'm a ludite and techophobe for the most part, haven't owned a modern car for 15 years, but have to hand it to my wifes 14 year old 'modern' Saab  though which does a 170 mile commute three times a week for several years, refuses to break down, I've changed the oil twice which is the extent of the spanner jobs I've had to do, its quick, comfortable and refuses to do less than 45mpg and yet to grow a spot of rust.  Still on it's original shocks & exhaust at 160,000 miles while my Land rovers sit there like screaming baby birds waiting for feeding & fixing daily.

I'm trying to clean up the aerodynamics on my Range Rover ambulance at the moment while preppng it for another big trip, as every mpg counts over a few thousand miles, and while trying to figure out if a smooth steering guard will help airflow under the axle to any extent or if I should stop buying shiny things,  came across this interesting technical paper written by a guy from LR and a professor on SUV aerodynamics - it confirms the defender is equivalent aerodynamicaly to a Spanish galleon compared to other models, took some useful tips to clean up the flow and reduce high pressure areas.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330412255_Improving_SUV_Aerodynamics

 

[monkie]

I always think this with cars post 2000. When I was a kid in the 1980s a car that was 5 to 10 years old looked like a right rust heap with a coat hanger for the radio aerial. My wife's car is a 2012 vintage. When washed it looks new and it still performs like a new car with no rattles or nasty noises and no smoke. 

[deep]

My most efficient car was a 1987 Mini Metro Mayfair.  Driving at legal speeds on a run, it would get better than 60m.p.g. (and that's not flat, straight roads either).  It was fun and it always started and went just fine.  My little 87-90 Peugeots did hundreds of thousands of miles with very little trouble and would get around 50 m.p.g. on a run.  By then, with electronic ignition and better engine internals and lubrication (but prior to the nightmare of early electronic fuel injection), cars had become very reliable and durable.  A car with the same interior space today weighs much more and uses much more fuel.  And when the rats get into your modern car and eat your fibre optic cables, you can't fix it or find anyone else who can (so far!  Frustrating beyond words that I have to carry a big transistor radio on the passenger seat of my shiny modern car).  

I actually wonder if cars are less reliable now than they were ten or fifteen years ago but that could just be you read the bad stories more now, due to the interweb being more part of our lives.  The manufacturers obviously are confident.  A bloke I met last year had recently bought a brand new Lexus.  When the engine blew to bits on the third day, no spare was available at all - they had to build a new engine, for goodness sake.  Then there is the infamous tale of the new Defender which got scrapped because someone cut the wiring loom!  Maybe we should say modern cars are very reliable until they aren't, at which stage they're absolute junk?

Where do wonderful, reliable, electric cars fit when they get some years on them?  Not much to go wrong?  

Sure...  I'm not trying to be unduly negative but it bugs me that people buy into modern folk lore and treat it like fact.  At the end of the day, we indulge far too much and I wouldn't care if some of the cost to the planet came back and bit us for it.

[cackshifter]

Everybody will adapt. The scroats will be nicking the motors out of them for copper as they won't have catalytic converters to nick any longer.

[deep]

I guess there will be a heck of a black market for batteries too, once the electronics become an every day thing?

[steve200TDi]

If anyone watched the new series of Top Gear yesterday, then you might of seen a glimps of what looked like (probably) and electric Land Rover Defender (Doing a drag race) which could be one of the kits mentioned.

Watch this space.

Steve

[Snagger]

It’s interesting that the head of the independent government advisory body for clean air issues has recently said that EVs cause worse air pollution than diesel vehicles because of their greater mass causing significantly more tyre wear particulates, more damaging to health than exhaust emissions.  Now they are calling for tyre taxes.  It seems they are jumping the gun on punitive taxes to EVs, which can only harm their adoption.  Clearly, many political quarters intend to end private vehicles outright.

[simonr]

1 hour ago, Snagger said:

It’s interesting that the head of the independent government advisory body for clean air issues has recently said that EVs cause worse air pollution than diesel vehicles because of their greater mass causing significantly more tyre wear particulates, more damaging to health than exhaust emissions.  Now they are calling for tyre taxes.  It seems they are jumping the gun on punitive taxes to EVs, which can only harm their adoption.  Clearly, many political quarters intend to end private vehicles outright.

I wondered when this would surface as a 'replacement' concern. 

EV's being heavier than ICE vehicles is a short term thing, I believe.  At the moment, everyone is chasing the longest possible range because charging infrastructure is in it's infancy.  Indeed EV technology is in it's infancy really.  Most manufacturers are just converting an existing frame / body design to electric.  Few are starting from scratch & really taking advantage of the potential weight savings, different powertrain topologies can offer.

It's inevitable battery technology will improve significantly.  It barely needs to improve much for weight parity with ICE.

That said, I think big improvements could be made in tyre technology.  Even today, we see some tyres lasting many times longer than others in similar conditions.  Perhaps taxing tyres based on life expectancy would push the market to improve things generally?

[cackshifter]

Well the old Michelin X used to last the life of some cars, so making them last isn't a problem. But making them last and grip....driving a set of X's on a barely wet road was a puckering experience.