Ran across this while looking for something else: Jeep Cherokee EV conversion. Biodiesel is still the way to go IMHO, but it makes for an interesting read nonetheless.
Old Repost but very interesting none the less. Even better then BioDiesel though.... The american territory of Saudi Arabia.casm said:Ran across this while looking for something else: Jeep Cherokee EV conversion. Biodiesel is still the way to go IMHO, but it makes for an interesting read nonetheless.
Agreed, I wouldn't think it would perform too well considering what the XJ weighs...xjj33p3r said:I wonder how it actually drives though... Quiet, yea, but how fast does it accelerate? How long can you drive it before the battery dies, etc.
woody said:Fuel costs aside from operating costs?
Its an old repost....maybe not from this forum...But since I don't frequent JU and can't stand the jerks and Pirate...I would say its a safe guess I saw it here.casm said:BTW, didn't realise this was a repost... Couldn't find it with a quick search, so just threw it out there.![]()
As with a gas-powered vehicle, the acceleration times and distance per charge (range) of an EV varies depending on the electrical system installed (i.e. AC vs. DC, number of batteries, type of batteries, controller power output, motor power rating, etc...). My Jeep Cherokee uses flooded lead acid batteries and a 1000-Amp motor speed controller.xjj33p3r said:I wonder how it actually drives though... Quiet, yea, but how fast does it accelerate? How long can you drive it before the battery dies, etc.
Yes, but it is all about sizing the electrical system appropiately for a given vehicle. For a heavier vehicle you just use a larger motor, more powerful motor speed controller, larger battery pack, etc... If you didn't, then of course the performance would suffer. It would be just like if you installed a 3-cylinder internal combustion engine into a Jeep Grand Cherokee... you'd get crappy performance because you used the wrong components for the job.beej said:Agreed, I wouldn't think it would perform too well considering what the XJ weighs...
Lead Acid batteries like the ones I have typically last 3 to 4 years in EV use. However, their lifespan depends greatly on whether you take proper care of them or not, and people have reported getting as much as 6 years out of them. Even still, lead acid batteries are the cheapest you can buy for EV use, and so replacing them every 3-4 years isn't too bad. Depending on what state you live in, you pay a disposal fee up front when you purchase the batteries, so that is already figured into the price of the battery pack and you don't need to pay anything when you actually go to recycle them.woody said:I wonder how often do those (twenty) 8vdc rascals will need recycling? and at what cost? Same goes for rebuilding the big DC motor.
This is true but only to a point. Studies (including one done by Austin Energy -- Austin, Texas's electric co.) have indicated that it is still much cleaner to drive an EV charged using grid electricity than buring fuel directly in an internal combustion engine. The only pollutant that isn't decreased is Sulfur-Dioxide. Luckily, this pollution and all pollution from power plants is slowly being reduced as more utility companies bring clean wind and solar power online. A last point to make is that if you have to make pollution somewhere, making it at the power plant is better than at everyone's car. Why? Because it is easier to control the emissions of a (relatively) few number of power plants than it is to control the emissions of hundreds of millions of privately-owned tail pipes. As an added bonus, you're moving the pollution source out of the center of cities where people are breathing it in everywhere they go.casm said:What gets me about these things is that none of the people who call them 'environmentally friendly' realise that all they're doing is relocating the vehicle's emissions from the tailpipe to the power station.
Yes it is! With my current setup, my Jeep's motor produces about 225-250 ft-lbs. of torque max. The difference is that it can produce this instantly on demand, and from 0 rpm. If I had a more powerful motor controller to drive it, this 9" diameter motor would max out in the area of 450-500 ft-lbs. of torque. There is also 11" or 13" diameter motors I could've chose to use if I had wanted more torque. Though the 13" motor is a bit extreme as it can produce upwards of 1100 ft-lbs. of torque!bjoehandley said:If he chose the right motor and wired it right, it'll be incredibly torquey, especially in 4lo!
Thanks! Yes, currently the batteries are still the biggest limitng factor in an EV. and thanks to modern electronics, especially Switch Mode Power Supply (SMPS) technology, all the other things that used to be big limiting factors of EVs 15+ years ago (real slow charging, poor acceleration, etc..) have been solved through the ability to make more powerful chargers and controllers, for example.Lawn Cher' said:Welcome to, Nick. Although I applaud your ingenuity in tackling such a project, isn't it also true that the limiting factor in EV development is battery range?
I'm not holding my breath for that (fuel cells, that is). Now, It's not that I don't like fuel cells per se, I simply don't like the way that fuel cells and "the hydrogen economy" are being sold to the general public as this "cure-all" that will suddenly solve everything (assuming we keep dumping millions of dollars of research money into it). On the other hand, Battery Electric Vehicles, which have been around for well over 100 years and could be made by the automakers today with a fraction of the money we're throwing into fuel cells, continue to be largely ignored.Lawn Cher' said:This is where the hybrid concept comes into play as an interim measure until fuel cells become viable.
Hybrids are more complex, true... cost, maybe. It depends on how you look at it (upfront cost vs. operating cost, etc.). So does this imply that you think fuel cells vehicles will be simple and affordable? I'm thinking not so much. Affordable... maybe if/when they're mass produced. Simplistic... I wouldn't bet on it.Lawn Cher' said:Unfortunately, hybrids involve more complexity and cost than is really practical for the average car buyer
Lawn Cher' said:Which is why I am a champion of biodiesel and ethanol... domestic renewable clean burning fuels that fit into our existing infrastructure and keep American dollars in our own economy.
XJNick2 said:These are definately a step in the right direction... I too would like to see more vehicles running alternative fuels like these today. However, in the long term, I'm not sure they are the best solution as they still aren't as renewable nor clean as electricity generated from solar/wind power, and they still depend on the inefficient Internal Combustion Engine to do work. But as I say, a step in the right direction for sure!
-Nick
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
bjoehandley said:MMMMmmmmmm.....1100ft/lbs................
Are brushless motors available for such applications as these yet and affordably priced too?
The average range of my Jeep on a single charge is about 35 miles. Note that this doesn't mean I'm limited to 35 miles per day, as I can plug in and charge in about 2 hours from a 240-volt outlet, and be ready to go. So it is possible to do much more than 35 miles if you need to do several trips (like when doing errands).
Another thing to keep in mind is that lead acid batteries are the worst performers when it comes to energy density (and thus, range). Better batteries do exist, but aren't used in many conversions because the upfront cost is still pretty high. A good example is the Lithium Ion/ Lithium Polymer batteries which are able to provide as much as 300 miles per charge in EV use. These batteries are comming down in price as their applicable markets (such as hybrid vehicles) continue to grow.
Lead Acid batteries like the ones I have typically last 3 to 4 years in EV use. However, their lifespan depends greatly on whether you take proper care of them or not, and people have reported getting as much as 6 years out of them. Even still, lead acid batteries are the cheapest you can buy for EV use, and so replacing them every 3-4 years isn't too bad.
This is true but only to a point. Studies (including one done by Austin Energy -- Austin, Texas's electric co.) have indicated that it is still much cleaner to drive an EV charged using grid electricity than buring fuel directly in an internal combustion engine. The only pollutant that isn't decreased is Sulfur-Dioxide. Luckily, this pollution and all pollution from power plants is slowly being reduced as more utility companies bring clean wind and solar power online. A last point to make is that if you have to make pollution somewhere, making it at the power plant is better than at everyone's car. Why? Because it is easier to control the emissions of a (relatively) few number of power plants than it is to control the emissions of hundreds of millions of privately-owned tail pipes. As an added bonus, you're moving the pollution source out of the center of cities where people are breathing it in everywhere they go.
dmillion said:Schwarzenneger is pushing for a new law in California that would provide strong incentives for more individual solar electricity installations. The objective is to get a million homes in Calif. with some sort of solar panels on the roofs within 5 years. The law has strong support from a wide range of business and green-type organizations.
Here's the kicker. The Democrats in the California legislature--who you would normally assume would support something like this--may kill it for no other reason than that it would be perceived as a "win" for Arnold. In other words, it's looking now like the Dems may allow partisanship to trump all. Is that friggin' STUPID, or what!?!
(In the interest of honesty, I should point out, it's not like the Republicans have never before let partisanship trump all. I firmly believe that partisanship is the largest sub-category of stupidity that exists.)