4-2-06 Re: Motor options

Hello to All,

Electro Automotive wrote:

We don’t recommend less than 96V for a very basic street car, nor do we recommend above 144V on the 9″ motor.

I’ve run Blue Meanie’s ‘properly advance timed’ ADC 9 inch motor at 156V for I think, 10 years now. Not a single motor problem, and the original brushes are at around 75% still. Many others, like John Bryan and his 192V Ghia with its XP super torque’n 8 inch ADC motor, have also not had any problems at all….nor has Bill Dube’s 192V Wabbit…this list could go on and on.
>Your privilege.  But I sell these and have to warranty them.  I want the factory backing >me up.
Shari, perhaps you are unaware, that  ADC left Corbin hanging when their 8 inch motors all started to burn up, due to how they shipped them at neutral timing, then didn’t back their product up. They immediately blamed everyone else, including the controller designers who’s output stages toasted when the motor arced to death. Funny thing (just using your own words, Shari)…when the owners of Corbin Sparrows advanced the timing, magically, all their motor and controller problems vanished. Damon Crocket’s DC Power Systems left the road going EV market over the Corbin fiasco after losing lots of money trying to do the right thing by warranting their Raptor 450 controllers that were burning up due to ADC’s improperly-timed motors that were fire-balling.

I have this funny idea of knowing the manufacturer (ADC) isn’t smart enough to advance the timing to 10-12 degrees so that their motors will run properly for the market they sell them for…EVs.

>I would love to see you tell Gary Dieroff to his face that he isn’t smart enough to build >a motor properly.
Shari, please at least quote me accurately. I said “(ADC) isn’t smart enough to advance the timing to 10-12 degrees” I never said they weren’t smart enough to build a motor properly. They once did ship them properly timed, then, when Gary was less involved in the whole EV motor business, they without warning anyone, began shipping motors timed at neutral without the ability to change timing holes. Actually, I’d love to talk again with Gary. I’ve talked with him face to face before, and had no problems talking straight talk with him. He’d more than likely want my input, as he did back in ’96 when he was amazed at the power I was extracting from his 9 inch motor back then. We talked for some time track side, about proper motor timing and how the ADC 9 inch had the ability to run at higher voltages when properly timed.  I doubt you ever have similar ‘high performance’ conversations with him over 96V conversions, though :-)

Can you say Corbin Sparrow?

That’s Corbin’s problem, not ADCs.  The Sparrow had problems with several drive systems.
Shari, you need to get your information correct before presenting it as fact. The Corbin Sparrows had drive problems ‘specifically’ with every motor controller they used, until motor timing was corrected that stopped arcing. ADC was silent about their culpability in this. I had to personally drill and tap a Sparrow motor for a friend who had one to advance the timing. Guess what? After the mods were done, the car stopped blowing controllers due to arcing caused by ADC’s motors they sold that were shipped at neutral timing! The car also accelerated far better, too.

Add in the fact that most of the Electro Automotive designs feature very heavy conversions with lower than average power, and you are asking the motor to work under even more duress. Most of the Electro Automotive designs use the squealing Curtis controller

Here we go again.  I’ve never heard the Curtis squeal except backing out of a parking space, when it serves nicely as a pedestrian warning.  In forward motion, I accelerate through that low speed squeal too quickly to notice it.
Perhaps your hearing is impaired? Review the EVDL archives of all the complaints from EVers, especially those who were embarrassed at parade events, EV car shows, etc. over comments about the noise their Curtis powered EVs made.

(Yes, even in my pitiful low voltage, low current car, I can accelerate that quickly!)

Prove that,  please. Please show data on the 0-60 of your 96V Rabbit conversion. At the sagged voltage under the 500 amps that squealer makes, you’ve got 40 hp to move 2900 lbs…..yeah, I bet it really hauls! I’d bet you’ve never, ever, drag raced it on a track with real timing devices. I’ll help you out here… My guess, is that it would have a 2.5 second 60 ft., that the 0-60 would take 17-19 seconds, and that top speed on level ground might be a real 85 mph, given several miles to get there.

And as for low performance, I have more often been held back in a 96V Rabbit by slow gas cars than vice verse. I have even passed gas cars going uphill….Sweeping generalizations about “most people” are usually misleading.

And you talk about sweeping, generalized statements? This hardly backs up your talk. Try hard facts, please. Try it like this….

The stock 1981 Rabbit weighs 1775 lbs., has 74 hp, and takes 12.6 l-o-n-g seconds to get to 60 mph. In today’s terms when the average economy car does the 0-60 run in 8-9 seconds (even the squeaky clean running 70+ mpg Honda Insight does it in 10.4 seconds), a 13 second 0-60 time is considered s-l-o-w! Keep in mind, this is for the light weight gas version…I haven’t gotten to your  2880 lb. EV conversion yet.

Now, pull the gas engine out that weighs 220 lbs. and the light weight gas tank and fuel lines and such, and you ‘might remove $250 lbs. of stuff. Now, put in the ADC 9 inch at 143 lbs., the adapter set to mate it to the tranny at ~ 30 lbs., a controller and braketry at 20 lbs., and the brackets and cabling for for all the batteries at around 50 lbs., and you just negated the weight you removed. Now, add in 16, 70 lb. batteries and you’ve added 1120 lbs. to the car. 1775 lbs. + 1120 lbs. gets you 2895 lbs. (100 lbs. more than Shari’s claimed 2880 lbs.) Now, most Rabbits weighed more, as in the 1983 version that weighed 2000 lbs……2895 lbs. + 225 ’1983′ extra lbs., and the car now weighs 3120 lbs.  Gee Shari, sounds an awful lot like my quote “a 96V Rabbit, a small car that unfortunately weighs in at over 3000 converted lbs.”

Let’s just round the conversion weight to 2900 lbs. and give Shari the nod here. Shari, again, please give the 0-60 time of a 2900 lb. car with 40 hp to move it, compared to a 1775 lb. car with 74 hp that we know does 0-60 in 12.6 seconds, and that is generally regarded by all automotive testers, experts, and drivers to be very slow in terms of acceleration power.

And the poor ADC 9″/Curtis 20x6V Voltsporsche?  90+mph. Yeah, pretty sad and inadequate.

Actually, it is when you consider several things….like how long it takes to ‘finally’ arrive at 90 mph, as in the 0-60 time of probably 16 seconds, and as in how it slows on steep hills struggling with all the extra weight (1400 lbs.  of lead) and only 50 hp to drag it all up said hill.

There are a lot of different kinds of people who drive EVs.    This means “most people you hang out with”, which is generally a like-minded group, a subset of the EV universe, not the whole.

Actually, I like to compare EV performance to the gas cars we all want to replace them with, something you seem to nicely avoid when talking about 96V conversions.

If we could refrain from calling other people’s well-loved conversions “dogs”, “slugs”, “underpowered”, and similar slurs and recognize that satisfactory performance is very subjective, then I will continue to refrain (as I have until this moment) from comments about testosterone poisoning and cars as penile prosthetics.

End Rant

Whew….thank god the rant stopped!

Shari, you triggered my post when you used the disrespectful wordage “We have this funny idea that we believe in following manufacture ratings…” in response to Jim Husted’s sincere and knowledgeable comments. Your tone was derogatory at best, and Jim certainly didn’t deserve the treatment.

You need to read what you write before taking a holier than thou stance as in the above comments. To be clear, I only referred to my car I once owned that I very appropriately named ‘Sluggo’. You’re now telling me I can’t name my own cars? I also quite accurately stated “most of the Electro Automotive designs feature very heavy conversions with lower than average power”.  Compared to the stock 1775 lb. Rabbit, a 2900 lb. Rabbit is a ‘heavy conversion’.  Compared to the 2000 lb. 914, your 120V conversion 914 at 3400+ lbs. is indeed, a heavy conversion. Your 96V Rabbits are slow, either compared to stock gas Rabbits (which can run off and hide from your conversion) or other Rabbit conversions with considerably better power to weight ratios. I also stated “a prescription for low performance” in regards to a 3000 lb. car with just 40 hp…no knowledgeable automotive person would call that anything but the honest truth. Apparently, you have a problem with an honest assessment of things like this?

If you want to talk about your conversions as being reliable, affordable, or in being adequate to get from point A to point B, that’s fine with me, and you’ll get no arguement.  Expousing the performace of heavy low voltage, low current conversions as comparable to gas cars though, is not wise, nor is challenging the opinions of expert electric motor folks like Jim Husted. You might just learn a few things from his 25+ years as a DC motor rebuilder.

Please, the slurs only came from you, Shari….”testosterone poisoning and cars as penile prosthetics”. I rest my case.

See Ya…John Wayland

This entry was posted in EVDL Posts. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.