I saw the following video on youtube the other day:
It made me do some research as I don't know why anyone would keep the manual and I found this:
https://www.motorbiscuit.com/yes-an-ev-can-have-a-manual-transmission/
I can see how this would be a way to keep your classic car on the street while still maintaining some of its charm. Would this make it more likely that you would do an EV conversion on an older car?
No. Pretty much all the examples in the article are how to do an EV the easy way, by just jamming a forklift motor in place of an engine - including the Ford show car. It's a technique being used less and less because most transmissions are not strong enough and you end up having to lock gears out and you lose efficiency.
Handicapping the conversion in an attempt to maintain an artificial charm isn't how I'd do it.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of EV's but throwing money down the toilet by doing it to something like a 356 is stupid.
You're burning cash doing the conversion and devaluing the car at the same time. It only works if you absolutely love the idea of an electric 356 and are happy never seeing that money again.
Putting an electric motor in a classic car simply rips out it's soul. Try watching your favorite movie without the sound.
I maintain that it would be cheaper and more efficient to have a manual shifter that did nothing but reduce torque output by 15% with every "shift". Heck, with no actual transmission to attach it to, you could easily have a gated shifter to boot.
More difficult would be getting the clutch dynamics. I guess you could invent a way to stall the "engine" in software?
The question of manual transmission aside, IMHO EV conversions of existing ICE cars rarely work well. Teslas work as well as they do because they were designed from the ground up to be EVs, but the packaging considerations for an EV are completely different than those for an ICE and the unibodies don't look anything like each other underneath.
You guys would have enjoyed one of the panel discussions at the SEMA show. It was basically about repowering classics.
https://sema21.mapyourshow.com/8_0/sessions/session-details.cfm?scheduleid=91
Note the panelists: EV West, Zero Labs, Moment Motor company. Companies who convert ICE cars. But the fellow who was not only responsible for the Mach E and the last two Mustangs, but also the Ford GT road car. And Craig Jackson, as in Barrett-Jackson. The latter didn't talk all that much, but was clearly in favor of the idea and relishes the idea of converted cars crossing the blocks - just like he did when Pro Touring style restomods started showing up.
There will be hack conversions like those Biturbos that keep popping up. But there will also be high end conversions like the Ferrari 308 - see what the owner of that car thinks. Just like modifying any classic, really. You spoil it or you improve it, and the determination of which you've done often ends in the eye of the beholder.
Project X is a well-known Chevy hot rod. It was on the GM stand at the show with electric power instead of a blown big block. Lots of guys with long white beards muttering about "they spoiled it, it's inappropriate, it's not right". But this is a hot rod! Jamming in a powerful motor from somewhere else is pretty much the definition of the breed! The problem to these guys was that the past desecration has now become the only right answer and the car has fossilized. They don't see that what was done was right in line with the car's history. (it did not have a manual transmission)
Nobody minds if you hack up a '57 Chevy. They made over a million of them, you can build a new one if you want to.
Considering that 356's are averaging $90,000 at auction, maybe not the best plan.
I'm pretty sure Craig Jackson doesn't care what he sells as long as it makes money, I've had to fix the cars that come from those auctions.
But this wasn't any 57 Chevy, it was Project X. It's an icon to that community.
Jackson is definitely into the financial aspect, but he did note that he'd installed a row of chargers at B-J HQ when they redid the building a while back. He definitely seemed open-minded and B-J does do some gatekeeping on what goes across the block according to him. They're bringing EV experts on board so they can evaluate converted cars. The "build a car to sell a B-J" trend was mentioned, it didn't really seem that he was a big fan but hey, auction fees.
So I understand that the transmission that comes with a gas powered car is going to be totally wrong for an EV, but wouldn't an EV benefit from some sort of transmission? Lots of them have a ton of grunt down low then start to taper as the speed goes up. Say you want a 200mph capable track car, wouldn't at least one gear change help? Or do you just gear it so that 200mph is still in the power band and the torque is so high down low that they can still accelerate? (Although induction motors are lower torque at very low speeds...)
dculberson said:So I understand that the transmission that comes with a gas powered car is going to be totally wrong for an EV, but wouldn't an EV benefit from some sort of transmission?
dculberson said:So I understand that the transmission that comes with a gas powered car is going to be totally wrong for an EV, but wouldn't an EV benefit from some sort of transmission? Lots of them have a ton of grunt down low then start to taper as the speed goes up. Say you want a 200mph capable track car, wouldn't at least one gear change help? Or do you just gear it so that 200mph is still in the power band and the torque is so high down low that they can still accelerate? (Although induction motors are lower torque at very low speeds...)
The latter method is what's been used. The trouble is that the performance improvement that comes with having a gearbox hasn't quite been able to justify the added weight and packaging sacrifices of having a gearbox, to say nothing of the complexity or cost. Also using a single gearbox for multiple wheels rules out the signficant traction advantages of an individual wheel-motor setup vs. any kind of differential. Kind of sad to say it, but I think direct drive for EVs has proven to make more sense.
dculberson said:So I understand that the transmission that comes with a gas powered car is going to be totally wrong for an EV, but wouldn't an EV benefit from some sort of transmission? Lots of them have a ton of grunt down low then start to taper as the speed goes up. Say you want a 200mph capable track car, wouldn't at least one gear change help? Or do you just gear it so that 200mph is still in the power band and the torque is so high down low that they can still accelerate? (Although induction motors are lower torque at very low speeds...)
Seriously depends.
The biggest problem with transmissions on EVs is actually noise- you don't need a reverse gear since you can just run a 3-phase AC motor "backwards" for reverse, but in doing so you can't angle-cut gears for less noise. Tesla gets around the need for transmissions by just making the motor spin to holy-berk levels.
There's lots of conversions who use the classic powerglides, one out of a El Camino using old Brushed DC motors making 4-digit torque at the wheels. There's reason to as a rando in a garage, but OEMs likely won't because the cost to make the motor spin faster for more power likely amortizes what you would put into a 2-speed box despite top-end efficiency.
I thought EV West still does conversions with two-speed transmissions because of the torque curve of the electric motors they use.
I don't think I would use a real 356; a replica seems much smarter if you really want a 356 shaped EV. At that point using some entirely different rear axle & diff setup and putting the electric motor ahead of the rear axle (if that makes sense, I'm not saying it definitely does) would be an option. I didn't read the article, shame on me, if they did go that route with this build.
The right way to do it on an IRS car is to basically replace the differential with a drive unit. And that's just what EV West did on the Miata-based "Lanark" EV they helped build for the upcoming Discovery Channel show.
The Project X implementation was an undisclosed (Lyriq) drive unit mounted sideways under the hood with one of the two outlets capped and a driveshaft running through the trans tunnel to a Hewland quick change rear. So no transmission other than the one built into the drive unit, and the Hewland for tuning purposes (and probably because it was already on the car). Not as efficient as putting the motor between the wheels because you're still turning the power 90 degrees, but a decent choice for a live axle. I'm still waiting for someone to make a 9-inch drop in replacement, at least one motor manufacturer I talked to didn't think there was any reason it couldn't be done today.
"I'm still waiting for someone to make a 9-inch drop in replacement, at least one motor manufacturer I taked to didn't think there was any reason it couldn't be done today."
I like this idea ^^^.
So for the GRM builder, something like a drop-out Leaf drivetrain? If you wanted something that felt like a 150hp or so ICE powerplant, what would you use?
Keith Tanner said: I'm still waiting for someone to make a 9-inch drop in replacement, at least one motor manufacturer I talked to didn't think there was any reason it couldn't be done today.
YES!
One of those in the back of the Cadillac would be great. One at each end under a Jeep or the old Land Rover would be fantastic.
I didn't know the history of the Project X car. I can see why some people might get their panties in a twist over it but it's a hotrod built and rebuilt for a magazine. That's what it's for.
It was an example of "anything done in the past is historic, anything done in the future is sacrilege". Pretty common viewpoint in a lot of areas of life, unfortunately.
GameboyRMH said:The latter method is what's been used. The trouble is that the performance improvement that comes with having a gearbox hasn't quite been able to justify the added weight and packaging sacrifices of having a gearbox, to say nothing of the complexity or cost. Also using a single gearbox for multiple wheels rules out the signficant traction advantages of an individual wheel-motor setup vs. any kind of differential. Kind of sad to say it, but I think direct drive for EVs has proven to make more sense.
Yes. ICEs don't have a wide enough range of RPMs at which they deliver useful torque to use direct drive, in order to both take off from a stop and also have the desired top speed you need a transmission with multiple gear ratios in it. With electric motors that's not true (at least for some of them), so they're often implemented with a single fixed reduction gear ratio.
Also, many electric motors deliver a flat power curve across much of the RPM range, so there wouldn't be any benefit at all to having multiple gear ratios when in that range.
Tesla originally tried to use a 2-speed transmission in the first Roadster (the one based off the Elise), but after many problems with reliability they gave up. The torque characteristics of the electric motors were very hard on it.
STM317 said:Keith Tanner said: I'm still waiting for someone to make a 9-inch drop in replacement, at least one motor manufacturer I talked to didn't think there was any reason it couldn't be done today.
That doesn't bolt in where a 9" pumpkin goes, it merely replaces the whole axle.
That won't help you if you have an A-body or G-body, which has control arms in the way, and bolt-in 9" housings available.
It's a stick axle, close enough. I figure you can make it work. The inverter is connected by wires, so that can be moved.
Magna could also create a version that is IRS if the demand is there that’s what Magna does. If you drive there is a good possibility your vehicle has some Magna content.
You'll need to log in to post.
