# Full Tesla swap into muscle car



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

Hi all, 

I am in the research phase of my project and have stumbled across your site and seem some bright people here. Thought I would throw a few questions your way...

I want to EV an old GM muscle car (chassis/body yet to be identified) with a FULL Tesla drivetrain. 
I have 2 ideas so far, 

one is to buy a 2015ish P85D Model S and transplant everything into the GM car (front and rear motors, full battery pack (mounted under the drives compartment), HVAC, screens, ABS, power steering, etc). 

second is a Model 3 P3D and transplant everything into the GM car (front and rear motors, full battery pack (mounted under the drives compartment), HVAC, screens, ABS, power steering, etc). 

Doing this, it seems that I wouldn't need to use any aftermarket inverters/DU since the whole electrical system would be Tesla based.

Looking for some expert advance. 
Plan is to buy a crashed M3 or P85D and move everything over.


----------



## 67BGTEV (Nov 1, 2013)

Looks like a great conversion. You wouldn't go wrong with either if those Tesla's. Don't expect same power in your conversion as in Tesla. I'll still be a great ride.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

67BGTEV said:


> Don't expect same power in your conversion as in Tesla.


Can you explain why not? This is surprising to hear. The car would weigh less than the original donor car so I’d imagine it would be just as fast or faster.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

I don't understand expecting the conversion to be lighter than the original Tesla, of either model. The converted car will have all the heavy parts of the Tesla (the motors, and especially the battery) in a body and chassis which is not optimized to use them.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> I don't understand expecting the conversion to be lighter than the original Tesla, of either model. The converted car will have all the heavy parts of the Tesla (the motors, and especially the battery) in a body and chassis which is not optimized to use them.


The receiving car will not have airbags, crash/crumble zones, steel body parts, etc.

Is there any cad mockups of the battery packs for the S or 3? I haven't been able to find anything.


----------



## Mick_D (Aug 2, 2019)

Your car will be a bit heavier because the weight of the existing motor and transmission and fuel tank is less than the weight of the Tesla drive unit and batteries. You'll be taking out 550 or so pounds of weight and adding back in about 900 pounds or so.
You'll get really good performance, but your range will be low, mostly due to drag. A '60s musclecar has a drag coefficient of, say, an angled brick ( around .50 or .60 or so). A Tesla Model S runs around .24, which makes it WAY easier to push all that weight through the atmosphere. 

Not saying it won't be a great around-town car, just saying it won't be a highway cruiser or something for long distance road trips. It's not likely that you'll be able to use the Tesla charging network, as they have a handshaking protocol that checks VINs against their database, and they keep on top of which motors aren't in Tesla service any more.


----------



## 67BGTEV (Nov 1, 2013)

EV_ROB said:


> Can you explain why not? This is surprising to hear. The car would weigh less than the original donor car so I’d imagine it would be just as fast or faster.


MD explained it. You would end up with a heavy dragster, which would have better performance than the stock donor's. 

If you end up buying a salvaged Tesla, ensure everything works, including the supercharging.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> The receiving car will not have airbags, crash/crumble zones, steel body parts, etc.


An "old GM muscle car" is all steel; a Tesla Model S body (including unitized structure) is aluminum.

I don't think airbags are significant, but it is true that the cumulative total of the safety and convenience stuff that is in a modern car is heavier than the equivalent for an old car... but are you really doing a car with no door beams, no air conditioning, manual-wind windows, and a one-speaker radio? It sounds like the plan is to use all of the modern stuff.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> An "old GM muscle car" is all steel; a Tesla Model S body (including unitized structure) is aluminum.
> 
> I don't think airbags are significant, but it is true that the cumulative total of the safety and convenience stuff that is in a modern car is heavier than the equivalent for an old car... but are you really doing a car with no door beams, no air conditioning, manual-wind windows, and a one-speaker radio? It sounds like the plan is to use all of the modern stuff.


You guys know more than me, I'm just trying to do the research. Seems like Model S weighs over 5000# and a GM old school shell is 1500#, I was thinking 
300# for each motor/inverter/axles 
800# for the battery pack
500# for misc hvac/steering stuff


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> Seems like Model S weighs over 5000# and a GM old school shell is 1500#, I was thinking
> 300# for each motor/inverter/axles
> 800# for the battery pack
> 500# for misc hvac/steering stuff


What does that old "shell" include? Suspension, brakes? 

If you compare the old car's brake rotors to the Tesla's, you'll see the source of some of the new car's extra weight. Now, with all that power, do you want the little old brakes?

Whether it is included in the weight you are using for the old car or not, the conversion will presumably use tires of a size more like the Tesla than anything from half a century ago, and that means double the weight of wheels and tires.

The 800 pound weight for the battery would be the bare modules, without any of the supporting structure and enclosures. Some people think just strapping down a few modules in the trunk or back seat is okay, but it might not be a good idea.

Just to get to some more realistic numbers, is there a specific model and year to use as an example, with the understanding that the actual conversion may not be of that model?


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> What does that old "shell" include? Suspension, brakes?
> 
> If you compare the old car's brake rotors to the Tesla's, you'll see the source of some of the new car's extra weight. Now, with all that power, do you want the little old brakes?
> 
> ...


I get where you are coming from totally, I might have over estimated the weight savings of crumple zones, airbags, etc.
The plan is to transplant this into a 1969 Camaro and make it an AWD Tesla swap vehicle that COULD use the supercharger network.


----------



## kennybobby (Aug 10, 2012)

i have to assume that you are a good mechanic with a machine shop and welding equipment available.

Maybe you could find a tesla that was totalled due to crumpled body work and remove all the body panels, then drop the camaro body over the tesla and french in the gaps.

Now you'll have all the functional tesla goodies on the inside, and it will look like a camaro on the outside.

Due to the aerodynamics and extra weight of the steel body as Brian_ mentioned, it will likely get less than half the range and be half as fast as the oem tesla, but it will look like a 60's muscle car. 

Search for the tesfalia, or the stretchla, and read about doing a swap such as you want. 

If you ever get a test drive in a tesla then you will surely want one.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

kennybobby said:


> i have to assume that you are a good mechanic with a machine shop and welding equipment available.
> 
> Maybe you could find a tesla that was totalled due to crumpled body work and remove all the body panels, then drop the camaro body over the tesla and french in the gaps.
> 
> ...



Yes, good mechanic, with welding equipment, my other car is a 7 second car that I drag race in the quarter mile

I have thought about a body swap instead of a retrofit, I still need to figure out wheelbase, tracks if I go that route.

I own a Model X P100D, this is what is driving the desire to swap the Tesla drivetrain into an old muscle car.

Appreciate those terms, I will search them and see what info I can find.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> The plan is to transplant this into a 1969 Camaro and make it an AWD Tesla swap vehicle that COULD use the supercharger network.


You're off by a year (should be a 1968), but that's an excellent choice.  Nice car. Unfortunately, not a big car, so fitting in an entire set of Tesla battery modules will be difficult. The recent eCOPO Camaro project used the trunk and back seat space for its battery, and the current Camaro is slightly larger than the original.

I don't think Supercharger use is a realistic possibility. Tesla manages all Supercharging with communication between the car, the charging station, and their system, and apparently disables any vehicle which is scrapped. I think it's unlikely that any vehicle deemed to be "written off" or a "total loss" by an insurance company would work with a Supercharger, even if completely undamaged electronically.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

I plan on putting the full tesla pack under the car as Tesla does.
I am just trying to find dimensions of the pack online instead of having to put my MX up in the air and measure the pack.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

kennybobby said:


> Maybe you could find a tesla that was totalled due to crumpled body work and remove all the body panels, then drop the camaro body over the tesla and french in the gaps.
> 
> Now you'll have all the functional tesla goodies on the inside, and it will look like a camaro on the outside.


But the Model S (or X or 3) is a unibody vehicle (not body on separate frame). Not many panels can be removed before getting into structure, and that body structure is the whole vehicle's structure, so you need it. Even if the dimensions and proportions worked out, blending the lower parts of the Tesla with the upper parts of another car would be a mess (yes, I've seen this done with a Prius and another body, and it was a mess) and with the aluminum Model S or X and a steel Camaro (or whatever) it would be especially problematic. For an additional complicating factor, the first-generation Camaro (like some other GMs of the time) is unibody from the firewall back, but has a half-frame at the front, so the body to be mounted on top doesn't have any structure forward of the firewall.



EV_ROB said:


> I have thought about a body swap instead of a retrofit, I still need to figure out wheelbase, tracks if I go that route.


A "body swap" implies that there is a separate frame and chassis on which to mount a different body, and there isn't in this case. Aside from this structural issue, the Tesla Model S is much larger is both wheelbase and track than first-generation (or any) Camaro.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> I plan on putting the full tesla pack under the car as Tesla does.
> I am just trying to find dimensions of the pack online instead of having to put my MX up in the air and measure the pack.


Module dimensions are easier to find, and the full 16-module pack is

7 module widths long
2 module lengths wide
one module thickness high, for most of it, and two module thicknesses tall at the front
... plus some space between the modules in each dimension


----------



## mane9 (Dec 1, 2018)

brian_ said:


> Module dimensions are easier to find, and the full 16-module pack is
> 
> 7 module widths long
> 2 module lengths wide
> ...


+ two on in the middle, top of each other. 

Just leaving this here:


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

mane9 said:


> + two on in the middle, top of each other...


Right... I should have said 8 module widths long, or 7 at full pack width plus one more for the front stack.


----------



## 4G63T (Jan 9, 2019)

Not trying to hijack this thread but my question may also be useful for the thread starter.

What exactly do we need at minimum from a Tesla Donor car to transfer over to another car and it will be drive-able? Mainly electronics or sensors wise so the computer doesn’t freak out.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Why do you want to do that?

You can't use the Supercharger.

You can't get autopilot updates.

The harnesses are all the wrong length.

And, worst of all, you have no access to the software.

Back on topic - the form factor of a Camaro sucks for Tesla modules - their granularity is a bit too coarse for stuffing into the crannies of the car - even the tunnel won't fit modules without extensive sheet metal work. I have an MS donor and a Gen 5 its stuff's going into, but half the reason for a pony car is it's light and somewhat balanced -- that's the struggle, while maintaining an aesthetic where your shotgun isn't greeted by a stack where the back seat was (even there, the module is not a great fit). 

A 1949 Merc "lead sled" starts out handling like a truck, weighs more than a truck, so it doesn't matter what you do swapwise or where you put the weight -- it'll remain the same POS as you started out with.


----------



## dougingraham (Jul 26, 2011)

EV_ROB said:


> I get where you are coming from totally, I might have over estimated the weight savings of crumple zones, airbags, etc.
> The plan is to transplant this into a 1969 Camaro and make it an AWD Tesla swap vehicle that COULD use the supercharger network.


There are a few salvage title Teslas that have been restored and still supercharge. If you are going to do this you need to make certain that the donor still supercharges. You pretty much have to move everything from the Tesla into your project because the car has to be able to tell the Supercharger who it is in order for it to start charging. Unless you fix everything you will have a ton of annoying messages to ignore. The car communicates with Tesla and while you can somewhat disable this it would eliminate software updates, Nav updates, voice commands, and the streaming services would stop working. Also, I would expect that Tesla would hear about some non Tesla charging at the supercharger right away. People would think that stall had been iced and complain. They would most likely cut you off as soon as they figured it out.

I suspect that a conversion with one of the goals to Supercharge long term is impractical at this time. I wanted this myself in 2013 when they started building the SC network out. If I had thought it possible in 2015 I would not have bought my Model S.

This will start to be possible when one of the other automobile manufacturers realizes they need the Supercharger network and takes Elon up on his offer to let them do so. All tesla has to do it make a kit with a pair of cables going to the battery, and a cable harness going to the charge connector. This would identify itself to the SC network and let them know who to send the bill to. You would need to tell tell the box things like the battery temp, cell count, battery capacity and it would need to tell the car to warm or cool the battery as appropriate. It would also need to control the contactor(s) to prevent a drive off with the charge cable still plugged in.

I would really like to see this happen. I don't expect it to anytime soon.

Best Wishes!


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> Back on topic - the form factor of a Camaro sucks for Tesla modules - their granularity is a bit too coarse for stuffing into the crannies of the car - even the tunnel won't fit modules without extensive sheet metal work.


I agree that the Tesla Model S/X module format is ideal for a flat underfloor pack, and very awkward for most other locations due to the length of the modules. It's hard to see where enough of these would go in a Camaro, although a few could be stacked in the back seat area (replacing the seat) if the floor in that area is completely replaced. The stated plan is to use the "full battery pack (mounted under the drives compartment)", but that means jacking the Camaro up by the height of the pack, and even then there isn't enough length or width for the pack.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> I agree that the Tesla Model S/X module format is ideal for a flat underfloor pack, and very awkward for most other locations due to the length of the modules. It's hard to see where enough of these would go in a Camaro, although a few could be stacked in the back seat area (replacing the seat) if the floor in that area is completely replaced. The stated plan is to use the "full battery pack (mounted under the drives compartment)", but that means jacking the Camaro up by the height of the pack, and even then there isn't enough length or width for the pack.


Thanks guys. I'll post up pics and a build thread when I get further along.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

I am using this thread to keep track of a few cad items as I begin to see if this will all fit.

Cad rear drive unit - Free CAD Designs, Files & 3D Models | The GrabCAD Community Library
Cad Model S engine cradle - Free CAD Designs, Files & 3D Models | The GrabCAD Community Library
Cad Battery pack - Free CAD Designs, Files & 3D Models | The GrabCAD Community Library
frame dimensions - G body frame CAD file?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> I am using this thread to keep track of a few cad items as I begin to see if this will all fit.
> 
> Cad rear drive unit - Free CAD Designs, Files & 3D Models | The GrabCAD Community Library
> Cad Model S engine cradle - Free CAD Designs, Files & 3D Models | The GrabCAD Community Library
> ...


Nice list 

It's fortunate that people are willing to put massive effort into building these models... then share them at no cost.

"Engine cradle" is a strange term - it's the rear subframe, of course. Also, in that one, the views as described in the 3D viewer are random: "front" is the left side, "left" is the bottom, and so on. I would be a little careful about that one... it is missing one of the three drive unit mounts.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> I am using this thread to keep track of a few cad items as I begin to see if this will all fit.
> 
> ...
> frame dimensions - G body frame CAD file?


Has the plan shifted from a Camaro (F-body) to a G-body (Monte Carlo, Regal/GN, LeMans, etc)?


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> "Engine cradle" is a strange term - it's the rear subframe, of course. Also, in that one, the views as described in the 3D viewer are random: "front" is the left side, "left" is the bottom, and so on. I would be a little careful about that one... it is missing one of the three drive unit mounts.


I'm just using terms that make sense to me. Subframe is a vastly different idea with old GM vehicles.



brian_ said:


> Has the plan shifted from a Camaro (F-body) to a G-body (Monte Carlo, Regal/GN, LeMans, etc)?


Plan right now is a 1987 Grand National with an AWD tesla swap retaining full battery pack under the floorboard.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> I'm just using terms that make sense to me. Subframe is a vastly different idea with old GM vehicles.


A structural frame to which the powertrain and suspension components are mounted, connecting to rest of the vehicle structure at a few points? That's the same thing, except that the Tesla springs mount to the body structure, not the subframe.



EV_ROB said:


> Plan right now is a 1987 Grand National with an AWD tesla swap retaining full battery pack under the floorboard.


The challenge there will be that the Tesla Model S has over 200 mm (8") longer wheelbase than the Grand National, so the complete battery pack is unlikely to fit under the Grand National... but you should be able to see that using top views of the frame and battery from the listed models.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

1987 Buick Turbo TType acquired. 
Current plan is to use a p100d model s as the donor car for everything except battery (since the pack is too big to fit) and a Model 3 battery pack for power. 
I’ll use the p100d battery pack as a power wall for the house after the EV conversion is done.
Pretty excited to start on this conversion


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

as expected the S/X battery doesn't fit, the rectangle box is what I believe to be the model 3 battery back size. I can't find a 3d model of it. If anyone has one that they want to share that would be great.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

One possibility is to put the pack ON the frame and channel the body...


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> One possibility is to put the pack ON the frame and channel the body...


Yeah once I have the car, then I can begin to actually get some measurements going and see what we can work with. Maybe the model 3 pack will fit underneath


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> One possibility is to put the pack ON the frame and channel the body...


I think that's likely worse, since the frame kicks up at each end, likely starting before the end of the pack. Side view time...


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> View attachment 124876
> 
> 
> as expected the S/X battery doesn't fit, the rectangle box is what I believe to be the model 3 battery back size. I can't find a 3d model of it. If anyone has one that they want to share that would be great.


You could place two inboard modules plus two outboard modules flanking them, plus a box on top for the "penthouse" of ancillary components. The passenger and driver sides are the same.


----------



## 57Chevy (Jan 31, 2020)

EV_ROB said:


> 1987 Buick Turbo TType acquired.
> Current plan is to use a p100d model s as the donor car for everything except battery (since the pack is too big to fit) and a Model 3 battery pack for power.
> I’ll use the p100d battery pack as a power wall for the house after the EV conversion is done.
> Pretty excited to start on this conversion


An S is very wide compared to just about any other car- the rear track is 9" wider than yours and the tires are 9" wide. If you are planning on swapping in the whole back end then you'll end up with the wheels sticking right out, plus you'll be stuck with 19" or larger rims to clear the suspension and brakes. Changing from a live axle is not a simple exercise as you'll have to somehow narrow the Tesla suspension or replace it entirely. Nothing is impossible but just consider how much work is involved which could be reduced by choosing an IRS car to convert.

My car is the same width as yours and I have had to remake the knuckles, camber and caster arms to clear OEM chassis rails, plus ditch the Tesla sub frame and fab up a heap of box sections to mount everything on. Fitting it all into 15" rims has ended up with some very odd compromises too as the Tesla disc alone is too big to fit in the rim, let alone the caliper anything else. Also can't use the Tesla air struts either as they go right up to the rear window line, so more fab work to put donut bags and telescopic shocks in. 

You'll definitely learn a lot that's for sure.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

57Chevy said:


> I have had to remake the knuckles, camber and caster arms to clear OEM chassis rails, plus ditch the Tesla sub frame and fab up a heap of box sections to mount everything on.
> 
> You'll definitely learn a lot that's for sure.


Any pics or a build thread you have going on. I was thinking of this last night. the wheels would stick out of the gbody. I could narrow the upper and lower control arms of the tesla subframe, but is that really the right approach....


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

brian_ said:


> You could place two inboard modules plus two outboard modules flanking them, plus a box on top for the "penthouse" of ancillary components. The passenger and driver sides are the same.


Not following your 'flanking' comment but thanks for those models Ill throw them in cad and see what kinda space we have.


----------



## 57Chevy (Jan 31, 2020)

EV_ROB said:


> Any pics or a build thread you have going on. I was thinking of this last night. the wheels would stick out of the gbody. I could narrow the upper and lower control arms of the tesla subframe, but is that really the right approach....


I don't have a build thread at the moment. The outer wheel edges will be about 6~8" or 150~200mm per side wider than the stock wheels. There isn't really enough room to shorten the arms, they will look like Trex after that treatment. You can move the inner pivot points inboard but tbh you'll get so far into vehicle dynamics that you'll need to learn how to use a dynamics analysis package in order to know that you aren't building in bad handling. I bought Susprog3d which is very good for what I'm doing.









Lots of fab work which you can save yourself the hassle of by using existing suspension out of something else. Could you fit the back subframe out of a 3 series BMW into it? Something like that


----------



## gregski (Sep 6, 2011)

are you a welder or fabricator? not being rude but being a huge 50s/60s/70s car fan I know none of them were transverse independent rear wheel drive, so it would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, and yes I know I am late to the party, but if you like Mustang's let's say, why not do a 90s or a 00s one instead

*Electric Mustang GT Tesla Motor Swap cost.*


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Model 3 has a 5 inch narrower rear track. Time to reset your donor DU?


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

gregski said:


> are you a welder or fabricator? not being rude but being a huge 50s/60s/70s car fan I know none of them were transverse independent rear wheel drive, so it would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, and yes I know I am late to the party, but if you like Mustang's let's say, why not do a 90s or a 00s one instead
> 
> *Electric Mustang GT Tesla Motor Swap cost.*


Already bought the Buick, and it's on the way. Yes I can weld and fabricate.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> Model 3 has a 5 inch narrower rear track. Time to reset your donor DU?


I was going to start looking at the model 3 track, that might be enough to just make it. Thanks ill see what I can find on grabcad.


----------



## gregski (Sep 6, 2011)

EV_ROB said:


> 1987 Buick Turbo TType acquired.


I approve this message, well done, I absolutely love these "Personal Luxury Cars" as they were initially called. FOLLOWING, ha ha


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> I could narrow the upper and lower control arms of the tesla subframe, but is that really the right approach....


That's not really practical, because the Model S (or X) lower arm is a complex casting, and any significant change in arm length would change the geometry to keep it from working properly.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

EV_ROB said:


> Not following your 'flanking' comment but thanks for those models Ill throw them in cad and see what kinda space we have.


All four modules sit at the same level, all oriented with the long direction front-to-back... one row of four modules. The longer "inboard" modules are in the middle, the shorter "outboard" modules are on the outside.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

57Chevy said:


> Lots of fab work which you can save yourself the hassle of by using existing suspension out of something else. Could you fit the back subframe out of a 3 series BMW into it? Something like that





remy_martian said:


> Model 3 has a 5 inch narrower rear track. Time to reset your donor DU?


While the Tesla Model S is in some ways (such as the integral-link rear suspension design) a copy of the BMW 7-series, the Tesla Model 3 is in some ways (such as the five-link rear suspension design) a copy of the BMW 3-series. The straightforward way to get a Tesla rear drive unit and BMW 3-Series style rear suspension is to use a complete Tesla Model 3 rear drive unit and suspension with subframe.


----------



## 57Chevy (Jan 31, 2020)

brian_ said:


> While the Tesla Model S is in some ways (such as the integral-link rear suspension design) a copy of the BMW 7-series, the Tesla Model 3 is in some ways (such as the five-link rear suspension design) a copy of the BMW 3-series. The straightforward way to get a Tesla rear drive unit and BMW 3-Series style rear suspension is to use a complete Tesla Model 3 rear drive unit and suspension with subframe.


Yup, the family resemblance to 1980s German suspension tech is strong on both cars. I'm even using E39 rear discs and parking brake shoes on my conversion. Interesting that they ditched the integral-link design for the Plaid and went full M3 on it. It does seem a better setup, there are quite a lot of issues with the M S suspension. 12 degrees of anti squat and anti dive is a lot, I don't understand how they arrived at needing so much, same for -1~2 degrees of non-adjustable camber in the rear which just ruins the tires for no gain.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Why would you swap in the cradle vs "simply" swapping the pumpkin out with a DU and fabbing axles? I would not futz with the suspension unless no other choice in the presence of an IRS.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> Why would you swap in the cradle vs "simply" swapping the pumpkin out with a DU and fabbing axles?


Because none of the cars considered by EV_ROB (or the 1957 Chevrolet being converted by 57Chevy) have a independent rear suspension, so "fabbing axles" means either mounting the drive unit on a beam axle (yuck) or building an entirely custom suspension and subframe.

We're talking about a 1987 Buick Turbo T-Type here. If it has the same rear suspension as the GNX (likely), it looks like this:








The T-Type might be different (the cast rear cover used to anchor the wind-up bar may be GNX-specific), but it will be a live beam axle with coils and control arms.

Yes, if you have an IRS and the drive unit fits, just have custom axle shafts made up to fit the drive unit on the inboard end and the original car's hubs on the outboard end.



remy_martian said:


> I would not futz with the suspension unless no other choice in the presence of an IRS.


I agree when that's feasible, but even in a different vehicle with an IRS the drive unit often won't fit in the stock subframe (which is designed for a much smaller final drive unit), and some independent suspensions (e.g. classic Jaguars and Corvette C2, C3, C4) use the axle shafts as suspension links so they're not usable with a modern drive unit without substantial modification.


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

I THINK I have the front end AWD system figured out. Going to be cutting off the front of the stock frame and putting on an AWD frame from an Oldsmobile Bravada since it is full time AWD 

I have found 2 people that have done AWD swaps on G bodies, and they both have done the same front end swap.
The front Tesla motor should easily fit. Will have to get that frame into CAD and them graft the two together.











Currently looking at some type of rear IRS swap- would be ideal and I can lose the rear solid axle.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

2010+ Camaro?


----------



## 57Chevy (Jan 31, 2020)

EV_ROB said:


> I THINK I have the front end AWD system figured out.


Like yourself, I am putting in a front motor. There isn't much room... Good thing with the LDU is its width is considerably reduced by taking off the inverter and mounting it separately. This offsets the axles but shouldn't be a drama. The SDU is slightly narrower, at least a front SDU stands upright so will clear a lot more.

How are you planning on controlling your motors? There isn't a solution yet that can run a SDU in dual configuration efficiently/safely that I know of. 











OEM front motor, still just as wide but slightly higher


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

57Chevy said:


> How are you planning on controlling your motors? There isn't a solution yet that can run a SDU in dual configuration efficiently/safely that I know of.


The current plan is to take everything from a P100D Model S and use that to control the car/motors. If dont correctly, the car/system won't know it's no longer a Model S that it used to be. 




57Chevy said:


> View attachment 124950


What's going on with your rear suspension? Any more cad renders? can you talk about it? That's my current blocker.


----------



## 57Chevy (Jan 31, 2020)

EV_ROB said:


> The current plan is to take everything from a P100D Model S


You'll likely end up with a car that can't be tuned and may have some bad habits. This was my first thought, then I realised that it will be a massive uphill battle to trick it out of limp/safe mode, and then I'd be stuck with the OEM traction control and torque profile which would unlikely suit my setup. The aftermarket is slowly rising to the task of creating a tuneable ECU like for gas engines so by the time you have finished your hardware it may be possible to ditch the OEM drive electronics and have it under your control.



EV_ROB said:


> What's going on with your rear suspension?


I'm sticking with the S layout but addressing a few of its shortcomings. The anti-dive is getting reduced from 12 degrees to maybe 8 and the non-adjustable 1-2deg negative camber is getting reset to -0.75 with adjustment. Instead of the loooong air-struts I'm going with donut bags and conventional shocks. Everything is narrowed about 9" so the cradle is gone and I'm fabbing up members to pick up the mounts and motor etc. The camber and toe arms have to duck under the chassis rails so they are custom fabbed instead of OEM. It is far from complete, I still have a good 3 years to go on this. There are far easier ways to do this, but I'm not doing it to have a car that goes, I'm doing it to learn about it and have a background project to play with while I'm concentrating on other more important things.


----------



## Marauderprime (11 mo ago)

Thats my forever car, a 1984 Monte Carlo SS. As well as my donor car, a 2020 standard range plus rear drive.

The model 3 is extremely close to the g-body in every dimension. The wheelbases are within 2” the track width is within .5”.

for a G-body, the discussion is going in the right direction. My plan is to cut the model 3 down to a floor pan/chassis, then integrate that with the existing G-body frame rails by cutting the frame rails to accomodate. The frame rails at that point would effectively be just to stiffen up the hybrid unibody chassis created by cutting the body off the model 3, and providing a positive location to bolt the Monte Carlo onto the new chassis, since the G-body crame rails would provide the exact mounting points. I would eliminate the standard body mounts/cushions/bolts, cut the floorpan out of the Monte, and then weld the body directly to the modified framerails. This is a heavily documented proven dirt track car practice.

once thats done, you are effectively left with a repair and replace of the model 3 components.Installing the sensors, the display, and other components into new homes in the G-body. Provided all of the systems are kept intact, the car should function normally, accept updates, and supercharge.

i am hoping the range will be similar, and quite frankly even if this car only runs a 13 second quarter mile, it would be substantially better than the performance it had from the factory, and it would effectively allow me to drive it for the rest of my life.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

I had its stablemate - a diesel Cutlass. Replaced it with a 1971 LS6 crate motor mated to a 700R4 four speed. Sleepers are fun...

Good luck on the Supercharge fantasy. Tesla has access to the onboard cameras, though they are slowly opening up to let everyone charge. The big question, and maybe our EU cousins know, is whether they throttle the charge rate on peasant's cars?

So your donor is a non-bent, non-flood car? Expensive, but a luxurious start for a donor. You are not going to have fun squeezing that battery pack, or its modules, in though...


----------



## EV_ROB (Dec 21, 2019)

Marauderprime said:


> Thats my forever car, a 1984 Monte Carlo SS. As well as my donor car, a 2020 standard range plus rear drive.
> 
> The model 3 is extremely close to the g-body in every dimension. The wheelbases are within 2” the track width is within .5”.


Not sure where you got those measurements from but this is what measurements I found


----------



## Marauderprime (11 mo ago)

2.5” per axle, so if you were to drop the body directly on , the front wheels would be 2.5” forward, and the rear wheels would be 2.5” rearward. If you’re going to the trouble of cutting the car down to its skateboard and welding portions of frame rails onto it, thats not too big of a deal.

also, you’re correct for stock track width, my track width is already in excess of 60” because of aftermarket upper and lower control arms, tall ball joints, and spindles from a different vehicle entirely.

I could realistically push my front wheels out another 1” very comfortably without the wheels extending past the body.


----------



## Marauderprime (11 mo ago)

I’m looking at this less like a Tesla Driveline swap into a muscle car, and more like a model 3 body swap. If possible, I’d prefer to keep the interior the controls, dash, steering wheel, etc. 

I’ve been a car guy’s car guy my entire life. I’ve had dozens of high performance vehicles, from old niche classics to new off the showroom floor fire breathing halo cars.

the first time I drove a P90d actually put me into a very deep year long depression because I knew from driving it once the writing was on the wall. Electric cars weren’t some quaint lip service niche vehicle for hipsters and Hollywood types.

my Model 3 may not be the all out highest performing car in a straight line I’ve ever owned, but its faster than the monte carlo is now, it handles better than my Z51 c6 Corvette, its the second most comfortable car I’ve ever owned (i doubt anything will ever touch the 1993 buick roadmaster limited), it requires no maintenance and even being the base model single motor 3, its runs as hard as I need it to being almost 40 and a family man now. My days of highway rolls in a texas 2k power level car are behind me.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

Marauderprime said:


> ... If you’re going to the trouble of cutting the car down to its skateboard and welding portions of frame rails onto it, thats not too big of a deal.


The car has no "skateboard". While Tesla is fond of displaying the Model S battery case plus front and rear subframes (with suspension and drive units) together as if they are a "skateboard", those parts are not even connected to each other; it's a skateboard with just skates, no board. The entire structure of the car is the unibody, which is held up by the suspension struts, with the subframes and battery hanging from it.

By the time you have removed enough of the ends of the G-Body frame to accommodate the subframes, and enough of the middle to accommodate the battery, the frame will be completely gone. By the time you've cut away enough of the Tesla Model 3 body to accommodate the Monte Carlo body, you might was well discard the whole thing and attach the subframes and battery to the custom frame that you'll need. Well, you could salvage the floor panel to replace the Monte Carlo floor with substantial modification.

As for the wheelbase mismatch, you could build custom quarter panels to move the wheel openings closer to the ends, improving the awkward proportions of the stock car as a side benefit.


----------



## Marauderprime (11 mo ago)

I mated a 66 mustang body to a wrecked 03 cobra back in 2008.

It took me 8 months of cutting measuring and welding.

I cut the floorpan and subframes out of the mustang.

i put the 03 cobra on a frame straightener, and it took 90 minutes to get the frame rails back into spec. I welded a set of subframe connectors onto the cobra.

I then cut the body off the 03 cobra. and welded box steel in sections to keep the chassis from drooping. I cut the floor pan just after the front seat and welded in sheet metal strips in to add length to the floor pan, and get the firewall where it needed to be.

i cut the firewall out of the 66, and dropped the body onto the chassis I made basically out of the floorpan and subframes of the 03.

it took 2 weekends, and 4 attempts raising and lowering to get everything to line up correctly.

we tac welded the body down in intervals, re-verified our measurements, and then started final weld mating which took several weekends because you can’t just weld a body seam from beginning to end, you’ll distort everything involved.
We were able to keep the front shock towers in the same relative locations, and the rear required some reworking of the trunk pan area in the 66 because of the cobra’s IRS (a stick axle would have been cake).

when everything was all said and done, I went back through and seam welded everything (which was a little overkill, but it was my first welding project of that magnitude so I erred on the side of overbuilt and over re-enforced on everything) and when I got done, it looked like a 66 fastback, went like an 07 shelby, and handled like an 03 cobra.

its the same principle here.

i was posting this in the hopes that someone had done a body swap on these forums already. This is becoming a fairly common method of adding modern performance to classic style. This has been done numerous times in the mustang community, and examples of cutting a modern space frame vehicle down to the floorpan and subframes are all over youtube.I was hoping not to be the first with a Tesla, but it doesn’t scare me.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

It handles well, perceived by the low body roll because of the battery in the floor and low CG DU. "Better than a Z51"? Doubt it.


----------



## Marauderprime (11 mo ago)

My onramp and off ramp speeds say otherwise. Your Z51 may be a little tighter than mine.


----------



## Dillzilla (Aug 6, 2021)

remy_martian said:


> Why do you want to do that?
> 
> You can't use the Supercharger.
> 
> ...


the main benefit is you can get all the tesla parts for fairly cheap if they aren't the battery. theoretically if you put everything together in the body of another car you can keep all the tesla functionality but reality says that you are going to have to use a ton of custom controllers for all the components to make them work with half the components flat out not working because of some sort of conflict somewhere. personally i would just use the batteries from either a standard plus model 3 or a model S with a model S drive unit. there is a rather easy hack available for the model 3 onboard charger/DCDC as well along with the BMS from evBMW as well. same goes for the motor controller. everything that isn't those components i would find a non-tesla alternative because you aren't getting those to work well without them being in the original car


----------



## Dillzilla (Aug 6, 2021)

4G63T said:


> Not trying to hijack this thread but my question may also be useful for the thread starter.
> 
> What exactly do we need at minimum from a Tesla Donor car to transfer over to another car and it will be drive-able? Mainly electronics or sensors wise so the computer doesn’t freak out.


if you are using all tesla controllers, basically everything. if you are using 3rd party controllers such as evBMW or stealthev, motor, DCDC, onboard charger, and BMS. There is a reason most people don't just cram a whole tesla into another vehicle. it is both expensive and extremely hard to do without the whole tesla system freaking out


----------



## Dillzilla (Aug 6, 2021)

dougingraham said:


> This will start to be possible when one of the other automobile manufacturers realizes they need the Supercharger network and takes Elon up on his offer to let them do so. All tesla has to do it make a kit with a pair of cables going to the battery, and a cable harness going to the charge connector. This would identify itself to the SC network and let them know who to send the bill to. You would need to tell tell the box things like the battery temp, cell count, battery capacity and it would need to tell the car to warm or cool the battery as appropriate. It would also need to control the contactor(s) to prevent a drive off with the charge cable still plugged in.


so thing about that, if you look into that deal with the super charging, tesla has no intentions of sharing the network. they made it to where the other manufacturer would have to hand over all their existing IPs to tesla first before tesla even considers approving them and that approval is not a guarantee, something aptera is starting to figure out. Aptera has been trying to get tesla to approve them for the network for nearly a year and have gotten nowhere. My guess is what will happen is that tesla will just start putting CCS ports on super chargers and "open" the network that way. they have already been doing this nearly everywhere that isn't the US


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Aptera is the last car on the planet that needs Supercharging.

They're clearly, imo, looking to be the 2nd car in the garage of Tesla owners...join the cult, be the cult.


----------

