electric car

OK. Simple question: What drives the generator?

Think about it.

There are a few ways to drive a generator. But first I must find one that can sustain the parameters of the motor. Then the next step is the drive. One thing at a time so that it is done right from the start. Can you recommend one that can do the job? or an alternative? Nothing is in concrete as of yet.

This is what I had in mind to see about. Notice, the circuit in the box is an operational unit. I use this in my 5th wheel for power. I can run all the lights, TV, radio, etc. all at the same time and have no dimming when I turn on my old air compressor. The circuit starts in 12v and goes to 110v. All power wired in 110v. I have not tested the actual out put for it works well for application. This is why I am in search of a generator to do a direct connection to the drive.

So you have a battery powering a motor that drives two alternator generators that recharge another battery, which is used to power an inverter, that steps the voltage up to 110V to power a second motor, which powers a generator which finally powers the third car electric motor.

This design is hopelessly inefficient and not practical. Where did you get the operational circuit (or diagram from)? The common way is to use a set of batteries in a series / parallel arrangement to get the correct voltage and then feed it directly into a power regulator to power the car electric motor. All the other motors and generators are doing is just wasting lots and lots of precious battery power thru conversion inefficiency. If you cannot get the correct motor voltage using this method then you just add an additional step-up inverter to get it.

This is similar to a previous design where a person had this great idea of using a small motor to power a big generator that then powered a bigger motor which powered a bigger generator that powered........ Something along the lines of a 12V car battery being used to power a small city. Hopefully you can see why this doesn't work (he didn't however).

Air compressor? 5th wheel?

jack of all trades,

Whoa up there, I think I think you are dismissing the concept as inefficient or not seeing the forest for the trees. Your perspective of design efficiency is skewed the objective is to eliminate oil dependence, that in itself is efficiency.

I am dismissing the concept in post #5 as the power needed to charge the batteries has to come from somewhere. Power doesn't just fall out of the main grid for free you know, we burn fossil fuels to generate it. Moving the point of use of fossil fuels from the vehicle to some distant powerplant does not make the problem go away, especially when (in this example) you need to burn MORE fossil fuel elsewhere than you would if you just used a gas car in the first place (due to compounding system inefficiencies).

I am all for good ideas but we really need to keep free energy devices and just plain wrong concepts away from real developments and actual proven discoveries.

Huzzah!

The circuit seems to be a perpetual motion machine , where battery powers the electric motor and the electric motor runs alternators to replenish power loss to the battery . Perpetual motion is a scientific impossibility and hence should not be thought of .

That is one of the silliest setups I've ever seen. Simplify man!

Battery => Inverter => Controller => Motor. That is all! Work some regenerative braking in somehow, either utilizing the motor or add generators separate from the system.

What type controller are you using? I would suggest a Curtis 500A AC type. For the generation you need to contact Kohler they have developed an automatic 100 amp generator that would act as a spare tire for your batteries (not sure if they have 72V but it would just be a different winding etc. config. Essentially it becomes a spare tire for your batteries. However it has different modes such as automatic and will sense the low state of charge and come on only when it needs to. Basically you would be creating a hybrid vehicle.

Thank you all for your input. It has given me more to think about and helped in solving some future issues on the conversion.

The only reason you tender for your wish to convert is economics. If so, do the math, I can assure you the oil companies have,

TC

Battery-->Motor Controller-->Electric Motor

That's the basic setup with the options:

Sustained driving setup (to go further than your batteries alone can take you)

gas motor running at it's 'sweet spot' w/generator --> Controller --> (battery if car is stopped) --> Electric motor

Any EV motor controller that's worth it's snuff will have provisions for regenerative braking.

I've been considering an EV conversion lately too but am looking at some new in-wheel motors that look very attractive but are not yet available for purchase: http://www.pmlflightlink.com/motors/hipa_drive.html I like these motors as the controller is integrated so you basically plug in and provide the power requirements and a serial signal of what you want the motor to do. Power is impressive too. With the motor out of the way, I'm now looking for a appropriate battery pack (lithium w/ supercapacitor bank for extra oompf) and we should be off to the races.

"gas motor running at it's 'sweet spot' w/generator --> Controller --> (battery if car is stopped) --> Electric motor"

But what about what jack of all trades said, the generator reducing the battery charge this way? Oh, the controller would handle that, right? But then I would rely solely on generator power while driving, I would like variable power available for peak acceleration. Perhaps capacitors are a good idea....I am also aware that this is the standard thinking so far, but will the 2 battery idea improve on it?

Also, this is only a slightly economically motivation for me, I want a "green" car, able to save on gas, and perhaps a proof of concept, IE, 2 batteries. I also desire the speed of acceleration that electric is capable of. In addition, I am a mobile mechanic, as my name implies. I now run around town in a ford festiva diagnosing, quoting prices, and setting appointments for my mechanics. I also go to sites and help my guys at times. I travel 100-170 miles a day!

A small car, with lots of zip, and economical would be nice, and is. I would like to improve on it.

32000 miles per $1000 spent is not an obstacle for me, I do over 50k a year!

I have sourced barely used battery packs from wrecked Prius's for $250, $150 each side for braking system for regenerative braking. I still have much MUCH more research to do, but I still have to figure out where to start! I am going to check on the links provided,Thanks!

Anymore input?

ok, for batteries, research or buy nickel iron batteries, some are over 100 yrs old and still working.edison invented but did not patent them they are only available from china. no one in the us will build somthing to sell to consumers that lasts 100 yrs. the electric motor hub concept is available for bikes already on the market. for regenerative braking on a front wheel drive, use a standard rear wheel drive axle hooked in to a gen head. engage for braking,disengage for driving.i have applied to join as 'ageniusforhire' and will be checking in from time to time.thanks, charles.

www.beutilityfree.com sells nickle-iron batteries, be prepared for stickershock, but they have sold some that have been in use over 50 yrs now to offgridders. 1-888-320-9211

Your only hope here is to add regenerative braking— That is an alternator/generator that is attached to each axle that engages when the accelerator is released. The batteries are then charging by the unneeded kinetic energy from the rolling car as it slows down. This also increases brake life.

The low range is a drawback from an all-electric car. This is one benefit of the hybrid. However, I would closely investigate the cost of adding electric power to a gasoline car. Make sure the cost for conversion will be able to be recovered in the remaining life in fuel savings.

Even with gasoline at $4/gal, it takes a long time to recover your conversion investment. For every $1000 you require to improve fuel economy, and if you can improve by 6 mpg: If you are increasing from 15 mpg to 21 mpg it takes over 13,000 miles of driving to break even. If you have less of a gas guzzler, and can go from 25 mpg to 31 mpg, it takes over 32,000 miles to break even. And that is PER $1000!!!

To make an electric car would it not be easier to have a front wheel drive car that you add the rear axel of a rear wheel drive and attatch an electric motor to the differential gear box. You can recharge your batteries at home and use the engine when you need a longer range.

I would forget about the regenitive breaking. It is too expensive and complicated for a home made job and the return on investment is too high.

Look at this very successful and inexpensive design: http://www.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportation/1979-07-01/An-Amazing-75-MPG-Hybrid-Electic-Car.aspx . This car and subsequent versions are very economical conversions which a skilled mechanic can accomplish within a few weeks.

Since 1980 I have seen two of these conversions although not exactly alike, they both performed well (70+ mph) and achieved mileage in the 70 to 90 miles per gallon range. Their main disadvantage is the relatively short battery life even with deep cycle batteries. Rapid discharges as imposed by the normal flow of traffic and accessory usage as well as regenerative high current recharging are detrimental to long term battery life.

I'm sure a more modern motor, controller, battery pack and generating setup would help this out significantly. I'm going to try and make up a shopping list of stuff for a conversion like this (I've been thinking about it for a while now) and post it one of these days to see what other ideas people have come across.

Aside from the reuse of an old transmission and diff...(which both introduce inefficiencies of their own) this is the only "hybrid" type system that I really agree with since the generator runs at it's optimum speed for as long as there is sustained driving (highways) and the occasional boost of juice in the batteries to make up for the conversion losses. Just enough batter capacity is needed to do the basics (i.e. 20-30miles to work) and you'll rarely have to ever put gas in the generator! Newer batteries/supercapacitors overcome the problems of older style lead-acid/deep cycle batteries.

Nice link...sad that ideas (which has obviously been around for a while) are not developed sooner but that's a conspiracy for another day.

there is a us online database of over 1000 electric conversion cars, i will try to find and post a link soon

One problem I see right away is emissions, a lawn mower engine does not have anything in place to reduce them.

Second, 4 lead sealed batteries do not seem enough to drive 400 amps for any extended time.

Also, a standard car alternator takes more than 5HP, and takes more than 15 minutes to charge one "dead" battery to a fully charged state.

Sorry, but I am not buying it.....No supprting evidence, just an invitation to waste $25 on plans, missing, and blurred pics of setup=scam in my book.

I'm sorry if you feel this is a scam. The diagram I posted was just an idea I had and wanted feedback on from people who know more then I about this. This way I can get a working setup without as much trial and error and wasted funds. The main goal is to get away from using fuel at all. However, going on batteries alone is not practical for as much driving that I do. Nor is fuel. For I am out of town a fair way in the hills. To give a ruff figure I spent $200 a week on gas at $2 per gallon. That was just to work and home. And the van gets 22.3 miles to the gallon. While getting a more efficient car would be better, it is also more costly. And a conversion on a small car can be done at a drastically lower price and pay for itself in just a few years if done right. With the expected hike in fuel???? Just want to get a plan in affect before hand.

Sorry, but no, I was not calling your post a scam, but the link in number 16. If you look to the top left of my post #22, it says in reply to post 16. The link provided was what I was describing, as I did not see pics in your post....and I am not calling the lady that posted it a scammer either!

Google perpetual motion, and free energy. You will see tons of stuff that claims to work, but BEWARE, it does not work! Heck, if some of these guys spent time looking for energy reduction ideas, they would get far, some of the ideas, and energy that went into building their machines is amazing, but flawed.

Your idea will not work, but I would not call it a scam.......

search the term woodgas, to run a gas engine on chunks of wood, or get an old diesel mercedes, or new for that matter, and run on waste cooking oil. my old beater datsun diesel pickup ran over 2 1/2 yrs smellin like chicken and french fries

Since I stated I have seen two of these examples operate I can unequivocally state you are in error in your assumption this design is a "scam". Further interations of Mr. Arthur's 1979 original concept are contained in later issues of The Mother Earth News.

There is no "standard car alternator" in the system. Mr. Arthur specifically states using a 28 volt 100 amp generator. A 5 hp engine can easily drive a 100 amp/28 volt (2,800 watts) generator or alternator. A quick check of any hardware outlet such as Northern Tool or Sears will provide you with generators producing 3000 watts or more driven 5 hp engines, here; www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_200315665_200315665

There are many hybrid vehicles now operating based on Mr. Arthur's original design. These versions are improvements on the original 1979 design with some being powered by OHV single cylinder engines rather than the side valve Briggs and Stratton. Emissions are measured in parts per million and all single cylinder engines of this type sold today in the US are approved by the EPA as meeting all emission requirements.

You can read about subsequent versions here http://www.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportation/1993-06-01/Hybrid-Electric-Car.aspx,

I'd be interested in seeing if you can better Mr. Arthur's, as you claim, "scam" efforts.

I had a quick look at the link. Elements of David Arthurs design are incorporated in modern hybrid cars but modern hybrid cars operate a bit differently. Davids original design effectively uses a gas motor to power a generator that powers an electric motor to move the car. In the event the gas motor-driven generator cannot provide enough power (steep hill, fast acceleration, etc) then the batteries discharge and assist providing the extra 'boost' to the electric motor.

Given the information in the article it does appear to NOT be a scam as others have said, in fact it is a quite simple way of creating a hybrid electric vehicle, although it is NOT a very efficient way to create an electric vehicle. Yes it will run (obviously), but not as efficiently as if you just ran the car off the gas motor in the first place (increased efficiency, greatly reduced overall powerplant weight (electric motor, batteries, transmission, etc)). Trades system simplicity for reduced overall efficiency and INCREASED overall running costs (when taking into account ALL variables over a period of time including initial costs and battery replacement).

Modern, more efficient and lighter battery and motor (both electric and gas) technology will make a design like this built today more efficient but it still suffers from the same benefits and drawbacks as the original.

So in summing up, a good design if you are a beginner and want to build your own hybrid vehicle to tinker with but not a good way of reducing your vehicle running costs or saving the planet. You would be better off switching to a lighter vehicle with a more efficient gas engine and driving it responsibly to increase your gas millage.

As you said' a good design if you are a beginner and want to build your own hybrid vehicle" however I disagree with the rest of your statement as to "not a good way of reducung your vehicle running costs". Can you please explain how operating a vehicle which gets 75 miles per gallon is "not reducing your vehicle running costs'?

And no one can "save the planet" with any form of transportation including walking (which has a significant carbon footprint). Saving the planet is not part of this discussion. Building a hybrid car is however and as you point out there have been many advances since Mr. Arthur's first example in 1979. Most of these advances are hundreds if not thousands of dollars more expensive to incorporate in a hybrid vehicle than Mr. Arthur's old yet proven technology.

I believe the original request was to aid in developing a hybrid car design. I think the questioner could be driving a hybrid vehicle in several months if he were to incorporate most if not all, of Mr. Arthur's ideas. This discussion has renewed my interest in hybrid technology. Now I have a reason to keep the SAAB Sonett which has been occupying space behind my garage for several years. Does amyone have a spare 400 amp jet engine starter?

Put simply, the MPG rating of a gas engine is only part of the picture when assessing the full overall operating costs and overall efficiency of the system (as a whole). For a gas/electric system such as this example your gas engine may have reduced gas usage and increased MPG when just looked at it from the point of how much gas you need to operate the car (when operating certain circumstances) but this increase has to come from somewhere. In this case (like in other hybrids), it comes from the batteries.

Lets have a quick look at Davids example, just from the point of view of system efficiency -

At speeds below 50MPH the car runs off the gas engine (powering the generator powering the electric motor). Although standard lead acid batteries are fairly inexpensive they don't store a great deal of energy and are heavy! This extra weight (including the heavy electric generator to convert the rotation of the gas engine to electricity) further increases the vehicle weight and reduces overall efficiency. So the gas engine has to try and push the vehicle along with all this extra weight, therefore at speed below 50MPH when only the gas motor is powering the vehicle the vehicle MUST use MORE gas. Remember conversion inefficiency's ensure that this MUST be the case, even before the extra weight is taken into account. You cannot have an over unity system or break the laws of physics.

When running at speeds above 50MPH (or a steep hill where the small gas engine cannot provide enough power) power is drawn from the batteries to help the gas engine with the increased load. Note that the batteries are just an energy storage device, nothing more. The gas engine needs to burn MORE fuel to recharge the batteries once the load on the gas engine reduces back to a level where the gas engine can provide enough power to move the vehicle AND recharge the batteries. Remember, the batteries are a storage device and must be recharged.

In certain circumstances the electric motor could be powered from the batteries with the gas engine producing only a small amount of the power, hence the reduced gas usage of the gas engine (and the claims), but this millage increase comes at the cost of needing to recharge the batteries at some time in the future. Overall gas usage is therefore increased.

There is no way around this. Lighter and more efficient electric generators, batteries and motors, regenerative braking, etc just help REDUCE the problem. You cannot eliminate it and reduce overall gas usage without exceeding unity or having an overall system where the power conversion exceeds 100%. This is impossible. Further compounding the problem is the necessity to replace the batteries after a period of time (which require a lot of energy and a massive carbon footprint to produce in the first place).

I hope that this gives you a better understanding on how electric vehicles such as this work and why they will not help you to save gas in the long run.

In spite of all of your analysis, the car still gets 75 miles per gallon. Where is the inefficiency in that? True it does weigh 100 pounds more than the original unmodified Opel however 75 mpg is 40 mpg better than the original Opel.

Replacing the batteries every few years costs less that the oil,filters,spark plugs and tune up costs as he has documented and as Mother Earth News has also documented in their own vehicle demonstrated in their mid 1990's version.

Also exhaust system, transmission/clutch, cooling system maintinance is not required and no expensive annual smog certifications are required. Also if properly certified the car can be driven without passengers in the diamond lanes of California's freeways saving hours in traffic congested commutes.

The more we look at what Mr. Arthur doesn't have to do to keep his vehicle on the road, the more it becomes apparent he will require far less in maintenance and tax dollars over a conventional Opel for the same distance traveled.

You may continue to argue this design is inefficient however the numbers don't support your thesis.

The answers were all there in my last post (I admit it did get a little wordy). I will try and simplify to explain.

The following simplification assumes 100% efficient energy conversion and uses per unit measurements to simplify conversions to illustrate exactly what is happening.

Operating vehicle below 50MPH - Gas engine puts out maximum of 1 unit energy. Batteries have 12 units stored energy. Gas engine burns fuel and moves car using up to 1 unit of energy. Battery not needed so still have 12 units of stored energy. Lets say its flat and the car only needs 0.5 units of energy to move it. Gas engine puts out 0.5 units of energy (runs at 1/2 maximum output).

Operating vehicle above 50MPH (steep hill, or both) - Car now needs more than the 1 unit of energy to move (lets say 1.5 units, its a steep hill), but the gas engine puts out maximum of 1 unit energy. Additional 0.5 units required! Battery supply's this additional 0.5 units. Car continues and batteries lose 0.5 units leaving 11.5 units of stored energy left. If car continues to go up the hill the battery will continue to discharge until nothing left. Lets say that it continues up the hill for a little while longer losing an additional 1.5 units of stored energy. Batteries have 12-0.5-1.5 units stored energy = 10 units left.

NOW.....

Operating vehicle below 50MPH - Vehicle over the hill. Batteries have 10 units of stored energy left. Battery need to be recharged from the current level (10 units) back up to full (12 units). Lets say its flat again and the car only needs 0.5 units to run, the additional 0.5 units of spare engine capacity are being put back into the battery to charge it back up to 12 units. The engine operates at maximum producing 1 unit of energy until the batteries are fully charged. Once the battery is fully charged the engine output drops back to outputting 0.5 units of energy to move it, so the engine now only needs to burn gas to produce 0.5 units.

This shows that in an ideal system energy is being moved around and used but no energy is being created by doing any conversion from mechanical rotation to electric back to mechanical rotation at the wheels. Now if you only want to operate the vehicle below 50MPH then removing the generator, electric motor and batteries will reduce the weight and eliminate numerous conversion inefficiencies meaning there MUST be a large increase in gas millage savings by just running the vehicle off the 5HP mower motor. Is this the case? Can you run a car like this off a 5HP motor mower engine and exceed 75MPG.

Don't be fooled by conversions between mechanical and electrical systems. The end result MUST be a reduction in efficiency over keeping it simple and just using the gas engine by itself in the first place. That is why you don't see electric vehicles powered by motor mower engines like this today, they are too inefficient.

There is no free lunch.

I agree with what you say about the losses in conversion...but also in transmission of energy like electrical line loss and fluid friction inside a gearbox, tranny or diff.

I'll keep it brief but here's my 2 cents about comparing apples to oranges:

An internal combusion engine isn't equally efficient across it's power band...I've tested this personally with a dyno'ed engine in a lab environment. BUT a small ICE running at it's 'sweet spot' with a good tranny is tough to beat for a long haul up hills or down highways.

Hills and air resistance at high speeds (particularly highway speeds & up) are truly parasitic and there is NO recovering this energy. This is my disclaimer for anyone wanting to go on a tangent about wind turbines or anything ridiculous like that.

A gas vehicle loses when it comes to stopping, descending hills and burning fuel while doing going through these motions.

Once there's hills or stops is where the electrics and hybrids shine...I've also studied this extensively as hybrid systems was my final project in school. Electrics and hybrids (IF they're made 'properly') can recapture the energy of the deceleration forces required to bring the vehicle to a stop...gas-only vehicles cannot recapture this energy and it is ALL lost.

So the more stops or downhill runs there are, the more hybrid systems and electrics will benefit by recovering energy that is lost to gas-only vehicles.

SOOOOO my point really is:

A small engine/generator combo is great in that it always runs at the same 'sweet spot' speed and isn't affected by stop'n'go movement of the vehicle. Open road highway driving? Pushing a big vehicle through air at high speeds needs lots of power...a smaller car, especially if optimised for aerodynamics sees a lot less of this parasitic resistance and doesn't needs as much power to keep rolling. If there's a headwind and hills you'd better have a book on hand as you might end up on the side of the road waiting for the batteries to charge up so you can make another sprint down the road at highway speeds to avoid getting run over by the hummer on your bumper.

The overall MPG for an electric/hybrid is skewed when it's a short trip that uses, for the most part, all it's electrical charge and very little fuel. I'm convinced of city/highway MPG after extensive testing...not a 1 gallon putt down a hill stretch with a tailwind...

I think I'm about done typing for this thread. Some like the idea of electric...others don't. Some are easily swayed by new ideas (not excluding fraud) and others only trust what they've seen in person.

Cheers everyone and g'night.

You forgot that you do not just go uphill and on the level. You average the uphill and downhill together and they cancel out.

The batteries are for the initial 50 miles and to act a a power reserve. The engine-powered generator recharges the batteries fast enough for any length of uphill road to be found in the nation. On the downhill side the engine stops as regenerative braking recharges the batteries and doesn't start again until needed to recharge the batteries again. Since 80% of driving is within 25 miles of home, where you recharge from the grid, you would only use fuel for the other 20%. The engine generator actually should produce more electricity while running than is needed, so that it will not need to run all the time on long trips. If you use a steam engine to run the generator it will also be cleaner, simpler and more efficient; be able to use any liquid or gaseous fuel it is designed for and by adding thermoelectrics can even make electricity from the waste heat.

Not a free lunch, but a cheaper one.

Hi GRZBR, In most cases the recovery of energy from regenerative braking is sufficient to minimize the drain of electrical energy from the generator to charge the batteries This leaves more power to move the car.

I guess what you have to really consider is your driving strategy. John did not realize the effect the 50 mile long uphill grade from Burbank to Lancaster would have on his available energy supply. This is where the design was overwhelmed by the demand.

John built his Opel according to plans but didn't realize the car was designed as primarily an urban (city) car subjected to many stops in which braking recovery energy and slow accelerations from one stoplight to the next kept the batteries fairly well charged. Conservation of energy was the key to successful employment of this concept, not the long term endurance use John envisioned.

Living in Nevada I can envision where you would face similar endurance requirements and therefore must design for that eventuality. I suspect you will need more basic horsepower and some way to use the output of the ICE directly for flatland endurance and hill climbing as suggested by others.

Again, assessment of your driving environment and the time you wish to spend travelling are the constraints which will shape your design and develop your driving technique. Your skill at driving this car will determine whether it meets the goals or not.

Perhaps you can test you driving skills by coasting at every opportunity. Can you see that slight banking in the corner which will allow you to maintain a higher speed on exit? Can you detect the best line to take up a hill? Can you "straighten out the curves" and maintain your momentum? Can you 'time the stoplights' so you make all of them green and/or work your way through traffic without using more power?

Are you really good at all these things and more because according to John, that's the way you're going to have to drive. You'll always be fighting the loss of momentum, trying to minimize the negative deflection of the needle in that amp gage which monitors the power going to the motor.

The success of your design depends heavily upon your awareness of traffic, wind, drafting opportunities and road conditions to name a few. Lots of luck GRZBR. I hope you are successful in this adventure.

The stile of driving you suggest is part of my life for I drive a truck for a living. While electric is just not possible in my job, it is in my personal life. As for the hills? There are only 3 ways to my home and all are greater grades then I 15 with the exception of the climb out of the L.A. basin. So endurance is a must in my daily commute. This is the reason for searching out a way to extend the power. While I have no intension on getting rid of my 1970 Ranchero, My Saturn is what I usually drive and still spend to much on fuel. All the research I've done on the hi-bred leaves something to be desired. And is extremely costly. But a conversion is within my range.

as for hybrid engines, check out infopop biodiesel discussion group. some people over there have bought a new hybrid, junked the gas motor, stuck in a small diesel, and run it on waste cooking oil. bite opec

Are you seriously suggesting that a lawn mower engine produces less pollution per gallon burned than a car?With new laws mandating catalytic converters, a small engine will still put out at least 3 or 4 times as much pollution per gallon burned than a car.

I COMPARED it to a standard car alternator, though I was not specific in stating it. A high powered alternator can produce more than 100 amps of power, and still takes longer than 15 minutes to fully recharge a battery at 14.4 volts, so do the math......twice as many volts, BUT 4 times as many batteries....hmmm.

Nope.

5 HP is still 5 HP. That toy compressor you linked to, how many amps does it provide? Nowhere near 100.

It may work as a vehicle, but an efficient and green one, with lots of pep and a long range without stopping, I cannot bring myself to believe it.

I think the problem is your failure to comprehend what you read. You identified the link I posted as a link to a "toy compressor" when in fact it is a link to a Yamaha 3000 watt generator which is powered by a 5 horsepower engine. I put this in my submittal to educate you a little because you stated it would take more than five horsepower to drive an auto alternator.

You also re-edit your statements. " The Spin" is what the politicians call this and you have attempted to put "the spin" on your previous statements to tell us what you purport to really mean as in "I COMPARED it to a standard alternator". Unfortunately for you we can all go back and read exactly what you said and it was NOT a comparison to anything.

You also misconstrue my statements alluding that I am suggesting that "a lawn mower engine produces less pollution per gallon than a car?"

First off Junior, Show me where I said anything about "lawn mower engines". I want to see the quotation. Again, you seem to have a problem reading.

However I did say that small engines pass all emission standards. Look it up. This time I'm not providing you with the link because you will probably ignore it as you did to the generator link.

Junior? Attacks now, is it? Name calling? That always seems the first resort of the ignorant.....

OK, I will play along to a point.

About the generator, toy I most definitely did say, and toy I meant. That toy will not generate 100 amps from a 5 HP engine. Period. Find one that can provide one in a steady manner, NOT peak, and it will not be running from a 5 HP motor. Calling it a toy is sarcasm. I will attempt to leave any more sarcasm out at this point.

"Spin", no, unclear, yes, thus my attempt to clear it up, but you are too obtuse to understand that, also too stuck on your favorite little pet to admit that you may be wrong. You are correct, I did not state it as a comparison. I thought it would be implied. I guess I was wrong. See how easy it is to admit a mistake? Not a drop of blood was spilled either....

How could I misconstrue your statements? Your first link, IF YOU READ IT, says that he used a 5HP lawn mower engine. I will give you that in the follow up link he notes that he moved to a 9HP diesel engine, but then compares it to a much more powerful gas engine because of the low end torque. Once again, I am forced to call shenanigans, HP is HP, but that is not my point. You then alluded to OHV single cylinder engines,(yes, you did, go back and read your own post) used in MANY riding lawnmowers today, heck, I have 4 different machines running off of Honda's versions of these myself, an air compressor, a generator(ahem, not a toy, 13 HP, it DOES put out 100 amps), a riding lawn mower, and a pressure washer.

While above mentioned engines do meet EPA standards, those standards are NOT the same standards as those set for cars. Look it up, I have, I know, it is my business to know; have you missed my name? Mobile mechanixx is my company, and I am a mechanic. I cut my teeth as a young teen learning to work on and rebuild small engines, so yeah, I know them too. As I mentioned before, the EPA is discussing new laws that would require adding a catalytic converter to all small engines. If done, they would allow 800 PPM of sulphur and other pollutants. New cars being manufactured today are producing MUCH less. My favorite car, a Ford Festiva, produces just over 300 PPM, and it was manufactured in 1993!

Speaking of reading, did you bother to read anything in this post before you joined in, or did you just skim along and decide to post about your pet? Your "pet" has nothing to do with the original question about what appears to be a misguided attempt at perpetual motion, until I came along asking about a long range EV/hybrid with two battery "packs" and a lot of pep. Seems to me your post was way off topic. But, so was mine. At least I marked mine as off topic to begin with....

As far as scam, yes, after reading the links you provided, I am convinced. In the followup story, mother earth whatever claims they had 60,000 requests for plans! At $25 a pop, that is a lot of dough. Yet, nowhere before have I seen such a thing, and you claim only two. Emphasis on claim. What about the other 59,998 plans? I attend car shows and swap meets regularly, never saw one, and I have seen a lot of strange ideas at these shows. Anybody who was truly getting over 75 MPG would be shouting it from the rooftops, going to car shows, have websites, and would be selling it, yes. However, if it worked, you would ALSO be hearing everybody else that it worked for shouting it from the rooftops as well. The only link I found for your boy with Google was to the pages you have already so kindly provided. They also, in the second link you provided, misquote themselves from the original link! Maybe they are trying to be helpful and have had the wool pulled over their eyes, but I doubt it. They do claim to have built one, and yet, I still can find nothing on it that PROVES it works. Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary proof. Just like UFO's, aliens, and ghosts.

As I said above, I am a mechanic, and I have over 20 years experience. I deal with cars and their emissions daily.

What do you do?

I cannot believe I let myself get dragged into this!

Btw, completely unrelated, but I need a few bucks myself. I have plans for an electric motor that achieves over-unity. That's right, you would never have to pay for electricity again! They are from John Bedini, and he swears they will work! Send me a $100 and I will overnight them to you!

a friend of mine has a service truck, in the back sits a 100 amp alt, hooked up to a 5 hp briggs mower engine, and it charges a car battery in about 10-15 minuits

400 amps, 4 1000ah 12vold deep cycle should get you 10 hours, figure ineficiencies and not complete discharge, should still get 4-5 hrs drive time.but the motor would have to be 12 volt, 36 volt, triple the battery bank or get 1-2 hrs drivetime

check out nickel iron batteries, they dont overcharge, full discharge doesnt bother them, they can sit 20 yrs and recharge to 100%. they have been known to last over 100 yrs, and of course arent made in the usa anymore. no repeat customers

grzbr: Try http://www.homepower.com/search/results/?search=electric%20vehicles .

These guys have been doing this for a long time and have a ton of information on all types of electric vehicles.

hope this helps

Brad

You need a fueled engine to drive the generator. Check the AC 150 Power System site and you will see the cost to convert to an EV. E-mail - beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk - and ask about alternative power cars. A lot of info there.

I just realized, jack of all trades was speaking of motor as in the electric motor, whereas I was thinking of a gasoline engine as a "motor". NOW I know why he said it will act as a brake, sorry about that.....

I am amazed at how many people can look at this and actually believe that you can run an electric generator (alternator) on a car from an electric motor on the same car and get power from it to run the same electric motor!

People:

You cannot get energy from a generator without putting energy into it. It does not spin for free. The torque that goes in requires energy to create it. That same energy will need to come from the electric motor that is driving the car. The energy you get out of the generator is less than the amount of energy that goes in to making it spin. THERE IS NO WAY AROUND THAT! It's called the law of conservation of energy (a subset of the First law of Thermodynamics) and states that energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another.

Get over it.

"it can only be changed from one form to another"

...remembering that there are losses with every conversion.

Useful energy coming out = Energy going in - conversion/transmission losses (friction, heat, etc)

Yes, absolutely. Thanks for adding that.

unity? get over it?

You know folks I was driving electric cars way back in the forties of the last century. I'm being funny but truthful nonetheless. The problem those cars had, bumper cars, is they were wedded to the track they ran on and the overhead power source.

Electric motor driven cars are a great idea. For instance, as has been spoken of here, in braking instead of losing that energy as heat, it can be converted and stored. Modern times, where we are, have provided some very interesting wrinkles, wheels with the motor incorporated, for instance, and now we are told by one of the posters here, with the necessary electronics built in.

And I don't think the original poster was looking to create a perpetual motion machine, his manner of sketching out what he had in mind was just a little inept both as to concept and actual machinery. The telltale in that was his looking for a way to generate 72 volts at over 500 amps capacity. It is obvious he has no practical idea of the size of conductors carrying 72 volts at that load.

The center of this problem, how do we get to a practical electric car (I don't think the commercial hybrids are any good because of the service complications of mating two different types of motor, I think they are a nightmare that transfers fuel costs to the service departments) is that of sources of portable energy which is not petrol or diesel or some other pollutant.

Of course on the part of government and industry there is also some fraud. You will remember Bush talking about being twenty years until hydrogen power. No doubt you are also aware that we run plain old reciprocating piston engines on gaseous fuels, e.g., propane, L.N.G., etc. Of course the twenty year issue is related to hydrogen fuel cells which have not yet demonstrated practicality as to common fuels or economics.

But, as you can now see, this triggered memories of an old energy storage system, one actually in use every day on every recip engine powered car, which, depending on its storage capacities would be easily rechargeable, and as well easily reclaim the energy normally lost in braking.

I'm not much of a mathematician, nor much of a physicist, at least not in practice although continually intrigued about some of those issues conceptually so... Is there anybody here that could calculate the necessary size, weight, and RPM's of a flywheel which when engaged as the drive on a car, could power the car for a distance of say 600 or seven hundred miles at highway speeds. Since safe practice requires a rest from driving every three hours or thereabouts, spinning up such a wheel, i.e. storing energy as mechanical energy in the rest period by any number of means, depending on size and weight, might make that a practical solution.

I didn't use to think such was an elegant solution. I still don't. But dependent on the maths it might be a real practical one that the refineries will hate.

j.

In school this was actually one of the energy storage systems we considered for our hybrid project. Unfortunately...flywheels are made of earthly materials and earthly materials break and fly apart. The size and speed of these flywheels (even just to get the vehicle moving a few km/hr) make it very difficult to manufacture as any defects would result in cracking which would end in the disc losing a piece...resulting in misbalance...bearing wear...vibration...catastrophic failure. When people talk of the dangers of electrical being the high voltages (avoid making sparks) or fuel being fire (avoid spills and ignition), while potentially dangerous for occupants and operators these failure methods are quite local and the damage they could cause would not extend much further than one vehicle. Now imagine a thousand pound disk spinning a thousands of rpm when a hunk breaks free or the pirouette the car would do with the bearings ever seized up ? The gearing requirements to transfer between the perpetually descending speed of the disk and the wheel speed requires much more than your typical tranny.

I have heard of flywheels on big trucks but this was just to help offset the instantaneous load on the engine when the vehicle tries to first get it's load rolling...once moving it's easy to have overlapping gears to allow a clutch to lock and transfer power. Expecting any more than a little boost is impractical.

This is the motor GRZB proposed to use by the way.

j.

$4900 Stock: 1-3 weeks Build your WarP 13 Motor Package! Shaft Configuration Tail shaft No tail shaft Shaft Rotation CCWDE (normal) CWDE (e.g. Honda) Shipping Location US - Residential US - Business Other Notes: 13" series wound DC motor Shipping/handling added at time of checkout (based on shipping location selected above): $150 Technical Information: Maximum operating voltage 170V, recommended voltage 150-160V HP = 43.7 @ 72 volts DC (452.9 amps) 135 Ft. pounds torque @ 72 volts DC (452.9 amps) Weight, approx. 300+ pounds 5500 RPM Exceeds class "H" insulation standard for temperatures Large style brushes, factory preset at over 90% contact Drive and tail shafts keyed - pilot bearing hole with 5/16 - 18 mounting hole Double ended shaft - Turbo 400 spline Fast fact: This is the motor that was used by NetGain to test Supercapacitors for NASA. It has been dynomometer tested and produced almost 2700 ft. lbs. of torque at the rear wheels!

Product Finder - Top-Line Shop Speed Controllers Controller Accessories NetGain Motors Motor Accessories Charging Equipment Cable & Accessories BrakingNew! Electrical Components Packages/Kits Clearance Items Fun/Educational Good Reading EV Source Blog 200SX Conversion Driveline Calculator Orbital Dimensions EV Source Owner in News Ultimate Deep Cycle FAQ Electric Vehicle Batteries Mind Your Units Orbitals vs. Optimas EV Heater Comparisons Common Abbreviations Motor Mounts Heater Core Extraction

© 2007 www.evsource.com
Logan, Utah USA

An Electric Vehicle works fine in its limited niche, however they do not replace the standard auto. The pro side is that electricity is cheap and while operating on electricity the car does not have any significant emissions. On the con side, EVs either have short ranges and/or slow speeds, longer ranges make them extremely expensive, none of them can travel 400 miles on a charge and recharging takes a lot of time when away from home, up to 6 hrs on a 220V outlet and adding AC, heat and power steering/brakes and all the accessories to be comfortable eats up battery charge. If there is a storm and the electric grid goes down you are stuck. Evacuation is impossible because of the short range.

To convert the little box on wheels, the Scion e-5, first you buy a $15,000 new car, then pay $55,000 for the conversion, which has less range than the original car. A total of about $70,000 and then add your home charging unit's cost.

Most electricity is made using steam power, because steam power is more efficient than internal combustion and it is cleaner. Modern designs for steam engines are lighter per hp than they used to be and the best water tube boiler is about the size of a hatbox. They produce fewer emissions than internal combustion engines and are just as safe to operate. Since the steam engine for a hybrid car just powers a generator at a steady efficient speed there is no need for superheated high pressure steam. Because you can make your own electricity as needed to recharge the batteries, you can have the range you want, but since about 80% of your driving is short distances it will be done on electricity from the grid and only the 20% beyond battery range would use fuel. Nice thing about steam engines is they will easily use anything that will burn as fuel, although for autos it should be a liquid or gaseous fuel.

Since you have a motor, you need batteries enough to power your motor for the speed and time you need to achieve the range you want, about 50 mi would be ideal and the generator should be large enough to keep the batteries charged when the car is traveling at full load and speed. The steam system should be hermetically sealed, condensing the used steam to keep it a closed cycle. You could even use thermoelectrics on the used steam line and on the exhaust to make a little more electricity and raise the efficiency a bit. This would also be cheaper because of fewer expensive batteries. Try converting an old rear-wheel drive vehicle first, as it would be easier. beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk has more on this concept.

Let's not just stay theoretical. My tendency is to get hands on although at the moment in terms of real estate or money that is limited.

Nonetheless, I did a quick look. First thing I came up with is here

http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/EProductQT75SCSteam.htm

a device they tout as a quasi-turbine which when you look at it, without the rotor in place reminds of the Wankel, internal combustion engines, only this is steam and will develop at least ten horses for very little input.

It certainly will drive an alternator of some size to charge batteries.

Don't have time now but I will go back and see how much battery we need and therefore how much alternator and therefore how much steam rotory power.

This put me in mind of another idea. Is a Wankel rotary engine convertable to steam. I have no doubt these guys designed this steam engine with Wankel very much in mind.

This little toy is selling as an unlicensed development product for $2900.

Tie it to an LNG fired flash boiler and we have solved, with a D.C. motor tied to the differential after dropping the crank shaft, the clean fuel problem, at least as a transitional step, since burn product of LNG is water and CO2.

Pick a motor that can be switched wiring wise to make it a generator and we have braking.

j.

Jack - Thanks for supporting my concept of a steam-electric hybrid car. I have looked at different designs for steam engines suitable for use in a car. I want simplicity, high power to weight ratio and efficiency as well as ease of construction to keep the cost down. Since we want rotary power I have looked at the Green Steam Engine, the Lysholm Expander design, the Cyclone Engine, the Quasiturbine and the Tesla Turbine. Since I can't test them and have not been able to find performance figures I don't know which would be best. The Wankel has too many problems for steam.

It can use ANY liquid or gaseous fuel that it is configured to use, even hydrogen if it ever becomes practical.

So convert a new car!

Actually I think that might defeat the purpose since it would weight so much that a n old "vanilla". Too many new cars are stuck in a loop of "add more options & size to look cool"-->"Car weighs more"-->"car needs more power to feel cool"-->"Car gets bigger engine"--->"car is now compared with other similarly sized and powered cars...and is found lacking in coolness since they've all just changed a bit too"--->start over next year, starting sales a week or two earlier to try and be to market faster so nobody notices your car isn't quite as cool as the others.

Side note: I confess...people buying cars for frivolous details drives me nuts. For me it's about longevity and low maintenance so electric has always had my attentions and the benefits keep adding up as time goes on.

I find it a bit of a shame that so many great vehicles slowly evolve into huge behemoths full of nicknacks that get used once in a blue moon... I understand attraction of brand/model loyalty but if the vehicle is constantly going through this iteration every few years then it's not really the same car you started with and learned to love...am I the only one that wants to love my car? <*looks around sheepishly*>

Someone please make the perfect modular car platform for the daily commuter and I'll be your best client! Make it repairable/upgradable at home...gas/hybrid/ev compatible...light...corrosion proof...etc So much of the money made on cars nowadays is in the aftermarket add-ons, upgrades and replacement parts...I think the most ecomonical car would be one that people would assemble and maintain themselves, learning more about and appreciating the vehicle they drive daily. Sorry to anyone who loses their job because of my world changing idea here but I have a tough time spending so much on such a big item when so much planned obsolescence & nostalgic thinking comes with it. This is a debate for another day in another thread though....

Have you seen the price for a conversion? $55,000 for a Scion e-5 box-on-wheels, plus the cost of the new Scion and your recharger, maybe $70,000 and up total. And the speed and range still stink!

You are right about building one from scratch. There are electric motor wheels that can be used for 4 wheel drive, just need design work so you can have disc brakes on them. To steer the whole unit would turn at the front wheels. No differentials, just a mircroprocessor and sensors to allow the inside wheels to turn a little slower. No transmission or CV joints, so less weight and complexity. The batteries could be spread out under the passengers or wherever desired. Add a small steam engine-powered generator to enable longer range and the use of AC, heat, power steering/brakes and any power accessories desired. Put a good crush zone frame around it for safety and a light weight easy to repair/replace body on it that looks sporty and you can get your price for it.

Just in case you might wonder about maintenance, a Doble steam car from the 1920's has gone 600,000 + miles with only normal maintenance. Modern steam engines are even easier to maintain and are just as safe or safer than internal combustion engines.

I was thinking (OH NO), why not connect the electric motor to the wheels by CVC half shafts to reduce unsprung weight and still have a motor for each wheel?

I don't know much about motor wheels but I do understand suspension. The more you can reduce the swinging weight of the wheel and assembly the better the wheel can follow the road thus handling.

On the other hand, motors in the wheels lowers the center of gravity.

Personally I like the idea of a steam electric hybrid. Piston or turbine? A turbine could use an eddy current output to run the conversion to electric.

Brad

You guys have got to explain the steam generator thing. We covered steam generation back in school but it seemed like everything had to be in the superheated range with high temp and pressure...along with cooling. Isn't this a bit big and complex for a car?

I've always though a gas/diesel turbine attached directly to a generator (no belts...direct drive) would be best. But on the other hand I have a train nut for a friend and claims there are some very efficient ideas out there but are considered archaic because the word "steam" gets used and are quickly sidelined.

As for motors just inboard of the cv joints. Yes, this does eliminate the tranny and diff but still takes space in the car. The big alure of wheel motors is moving the bulk of the motor somewhere. Newer motors are good enough that regular wheels can be used and can regenerate (or bleed power through internal resistance) to completely replace the disc brakes and the old wheel assembly gets replaced by the specialized motor at the end of your suspension. Bolt on your wheel and away you go. Take a look at http://www.pmlflightlink.com/

Steam generation is like saying electrical generation/production. The science is quite mature. What has changed is our materials and command, control, data acquisition.

Efficiencies for low or high pressure systems is also well established and as a good friend of mine says the goesinas have to equal the goesoutas.

It's been a few years sense I've played with the numbers so you would be better off looking up the info or a steam expert.

As for a turbine direct driving a generator you have a problem with RPM. Turbines create high RPM and low torque, 10K to over 100K RPM (the smaller the faster), most Gen-sets use lower RPM and higher torque. A generator for a turbine will need special designing or a reduction system to match speeds and torque requirements. Eddy current drives are used on everything from wood lathes to sub prop shafts for infinitely variable speed control.

Thanks for the link, the Hi-Pa Drive™ is the only one I found weights for so far and they add 40 to 55lbs to the wheel weight plus they will need heavier suspension to handle the weight. Still very usable.

Gotta work

Brad

It wasn't too big and complex for the Stanley Steamer or the Doble. Superheating with high temperatures and pressures is for the dry steam needed by turbines. There are many steam engines that run quite well on low pressure steam at about 300 degrees F.

Your friend is right, in fact there is a Swiss company making steam locomotives the right way, that are superior to diesel-electrics. Too many people hear "steam" and their mind turns off, all the anti-steam lies from the IC engine makers come out and the technology is ridiculed. I have sent my collection of facts to people and from their answers it is obvious they never read them.

The motor/wheel turns to steer like a regular wheel, therefore no CV joints either.

Not a bladed turbine, they require superheated dry steam at high pressure. The Tesla Turbine can run using low-pressure steam. Mini-Cooper built an EV prototype using motor wheels, regenerative braking, but the law requires mechanical brakes.

Look up the Green Steam Engine, Cyclone Engine and Lysholm Expander for some rotary power designs. Investigate the Lamont boiler design for small size and high output.

e-mail - beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk - and ask about steam-electric for more info

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/304945/Morgan's+clean+break.htm

they rethought the approach to ev design, it's worth a read

Looks like we all have covered most of the problem except perhaps the matter of excess cost.

I've looked at some of the motors touted as specifically for ev and the prices are outrageous. Same is true for most of the other stuff.

The same or equivalents should be available off the shelf for a fraction of the prices quoted. Consider! Virtually every practical problem in design, looked at individually, has cropped up and been solved in industry in one form or another.

If I were going to build a car tomorrow I would simply go to industrial mill supply catalogs. I sure as hell wouldn't give somebody three thousand dollars for a motor. I wouldn't give that amount for that little steam engine I posted. I would bet somebody has mass produced something like that for something mundane where it was preferable to supply steam instead of electricity.

So don't get ripped off. Look for parts and assembly's in supply outfits for industries that are likely to need the same thing you need, albeit, your application being relatively radical.

For those of you wrangling about applications that don't have the background of say Mobilemechanic, or my own in industrial maintenance, and hence lack an understanding of how to equate petrol engine HP to electric motor HP (ft lbs of torque obviously and the manner and time in the motor cycle when it is developed), I would suggest reading. You may have to start at the beginning, i.e., rudimantary physics, but so be it. Better than spending a lot of money and bombing out.

I must admit, even whilst I am lecturing, that although I am in the habit of just picking hardware off the shelf because it just feels right; in the case of electric motors for a car and that peculiar application, my hands on mechanical instinct is at sea. I too will have to figure it out by the numbers.

That applies not just to the motors but just as well to things like wire size. Has anybody considered that some of the ampere loads talked about here require wires an inch in diameter? Of course you control that by going up in voltage which has its own problems.

Enough. I'm out of here.

j.

Amen...

Ayep, enuff 'snuff, the wrangling is getting old, but please do look for a post from me soon where I will seriously be seeking advice for my small car/hybrid w/2 batteries idea. I expect it to be shot down, but I NEED to know WHAT is wrong with it.

While I appreciate the compliment, Jack, there are many things involving electric motors, and their batteries, that I need to learn.

I learn FAST though!

GREAT discussion, however, and if someone can answer the original poster on HOW to get the constant 72v and 376.3 amps to 58.5 amps he needs, I am positive he will be glad his thread gets back on track, I am sorry I did some hijacking on it.....

Sounds interesting...do you have a webpage or anything? I'm converting an eagle talon but just got started and batteries are the last thing I'll be adding. eagletalonev.blogspot.com

How are you going to power your alternator or generator?

Killing 2 birds with one stone here for answers.

I am thinking 2 batteries as in possibly, 2 batteries scavenged from toyota prius, not 2 small car batteries. They can be sourced for about $500...

Powering alternator or generator? I do not know, yet. Business slows down for me in the summer, and I am going to devote some time then to getting the idea off the ground. I will be looking on this forum, amongst other places, for a TON of help with this project, and I can easily see it lasting up to 2 years. On the other hand, some local business owners that I have spoken to are interested in the idea, and may help sponsor me, so that(money) may help speed up the project.

I also hope that I have a website up by May 24th, but that date is not yet written in stone...

Just look for me to post for help soon, and you will learn what I plan to do, as I figure it out!

On the subject of killing multiple birds with a single stone, I believe Cincy10 was asking the original poster grzbr, how he/she was going to power his/her perpetual motion free-energy vehicle (see post 5) which is what the original topic thread was about.

Keep us informed on your EV project you mentioned as it progresses (have you started another thread on it yet? Posting here is only going to get confusing, especially since this thread is regarding a hopelessly conceived free-energy vehicle).

Thanks for pointing that out, I missed that!

You are right about posting here, but I did want to answer a question to me to be polite...

I have progressed little, although, as I said, I have a couple of possible sponsors. That is encouraging to say the least. These are business owners who are also regular customers of mine, and they believe that if I say I think I can do it, I just might succeed! As of this time, I am still brainstorming a bit, and doing more with organizing my thoughts on how to proceed. I honestly do not expect to start real, physical work until mid to late summer, if then. I will first need to get together ALL ideas, and suggestions into a workable plan. I want ALL of my ducks in a row before I begin.

Old prius batteries? Where do you find something like that??? I'm interested in finding some cheap packs to tide me over for a couple years until more hybrids, PHEVs and EVs hit the road to bring the price of new packs down.

Check your local junkyards...

Hay, I don't want to throw another wrench into this Project, but I think a lot of you guys have valid points. Some are nay sayers.

When you try to build something, try to stay from exotic components. use the KISS principle. Keep it simple stupid!! And I am not calling anyone stupid,

That said ,We have a lot of Hybrid cars out now and should pick the brains that are building them, ( not directly) and see what they did. There are service people out there now and they had to be trained to keep these new toys running.

Batteries are everyones down fall. recharging on the road, another pit we have to stay out of.

Electric motors have always been stronger than Gas Or Diesel.

Look at the Diesel electric train engines, Here you have a large Fairbanks Morse and G E etc Diesels run a Generator to run Motors in the drive trucks of the engines.

Yes it is a very large scale, that you would not use in a personal transportation vehicle. But they have been doing it for years now, and some of these freight trains are a mile long. Granted they use 3-5 engines,but that is a lot of weight to move.

We also have handicap scooters that give 25 miles for a single charge, granted they only go 5-10 miles an hour, but the technology is there. look at the kids ride on toys and the new battery powered kids scooters, Also the cream of the crop Segway probably not spelled right but, you get the idea.(just saw them in passing, know nothing about them except I can not afford one, and don't know if I could keep my balance on one).

Also golf carts can do 25 miles an hour, don't know what they use for Batteries, but I think they are 2 twelve volt deep cycle ones. Have not had the pleasure of taking one apart of repairing one. The also have gas/electric ones also.

One should also think about Forklift trucks, Reach trucks, and all sorts of pallet jack vehicles, they run most every day for 8-12 hours at a time, some without being recharged. They use a lot of hydraulic drive applications.

There have been a number of electric vehicles built in the early days of the automobile, both commercial use and personal transportation.

Back in the 30's they had electric milk trucks used in Providence R.I. ,I do not know how well they worked compared to gasoline,(I am not that old to remember them knowledge is from my uncle an my grandfather who delivered milk with a horse and wagon when he started working at age 14)but the 38 Hurricane wiped them out due to the flood waters like New Orleans and there 100 year old pumps that kept the city dry. I am not knocking there 100 year old pumps, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it, you will only cause more trouble.

We build motors now to be submersible and pump, move ships and a number of other uses.

Today we travel a lot faster than before, and that puts added strain on and drive train that we build.

I better get off my soap box before someone shoots me but as a leaving thought, when we think of reinventing the wheel, why don't we do like the Japanese did/do, Copy what has been done and improve on it, look at all the types of Hybrid/electric vehicles and borrow from each and try to make it with off the shelf items.

Papa Tait Seekonk,Ma.

the old school batteries were nickel-iron batteries.they last 50-100 yrs, jay lennos 1901 somthing or another electric car still runs on the original battery pack. www.beutilityfree.com is the only us importer i have found.and they only import every 3 months. next order goes in end of sept. cant overcharge them, cant damage them with continuous complete discharge, throw them in the shed, pull em out 20 yrs later, charge them up and they work like new. no one in the us makes them anymore because you get no repeat customers, they do not fit the throwaway and pay taxes for new business plan society we now have. btw, a 122ah 12volt nickel-iron battery costs $840