# Eluminator in a Lotus 7



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

I'm looking into one for my C5 and might even use one in the Gen 5 Camaro SS. Need to find a good axle maker for these, so if anyone has recommends....

Shipping is to the dealer or can be to a freight terminal if not buying from the parts department. I'm 20 minutes to the grocery store, have my own forklift, yet Fedex's computer billing still hits me with a residential surcharge out here 🤬

The parts department has the inverter, but it's undocumented AFAIK. Looking at Sandy Monroe's horrible teardown (more verbal than physical abuse as a "teardown" in that video...maybe some bad attitude because he _used to_ work for Ford?), the inverter is such a messy assembly that I think it's good it doesn't come with the drive unit. If it was documented as far as CAN command, maybe.

The mounts aren't any more beefy than what's needed for the diff on any ~300HP electric car build. It's from Borg-Warner, a top tier supplier (yes, even for the first Tesla Roadster, fanboys), so quality should not be an issue.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Looking for comments on Ford’s Emulator motor...


Just to make it easier for people to find this thread, and for people interested in the drive unit to find more information, I'll note that it's call "*Eluminator*", not "Emulator".


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> The mounts aren't any more beefy than what's needed for the diff on any ~300HP electric car build. It's from Borg-Warner, a top tier supplier (yes, even for the first Tesla Roadster, fanboys), so quality should not be an issue.


I agree - it takes the same reaction torque around the axle shaft axis as the final drive in any IRS of the same output, and it takes no propeller shaft (driveshaft) reaction torque. The mounts do need to hold the up the weight of the entire unit, which is much greater than that of just a final drive.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> I'm looking into one for my C5 and might even use one in the Gen 5 Camaro SS. Need to find a good axle maker for these, so if anyone has recommends...


The Mach-E appears to use a common tripod inboard and Rzeppa or Birfield type outboard joints; the plunge travel would then all be provided by the inboard joint. It appears that the C5 and later Corvettes are the same. I suppose the key would be to find the spline specs for the tripod joint to see if a custom axle shaft (bar) can be made - splined to your car's outboard joints on the outer end and the Mach-E tripod joints on the inboard end and whatever length suits the components and desired track width - to use the CV joints of the car and drive unit without modification. Of course replacement parts from Ford are just complete axle assemblies (and replacement boots) so they're not useful sources of details. Maybe just buy a dead axle shaft from a wrecker (core/scrap value) and take it apart to see?

Looking for Corvette examples I noticed that GForce Performance Engineering offers axle assemblies using aftermarket joints (108 mm "930" style, presumably plunging inboard and non-plunging outboard) and Corvette-specific stub shafts flanged to work with them, and custom-length axle shafts (bars). Since they also offer similar shafts for the (real) Mustang, they could presumably mix-and-match inboard Ford and outboard GM parts. It's unlikely that the Mach-E drive unit uses stub shafts interchangeable with the Mustang, but it might be worth asking if they do or if there is an available fix.

The same parts mix-and-match exercise, perhaps with custom-built axle shaft bars, can potentially work in many situations. 

In his Westfalia T3 with Chevy Bolt drivetrain, Yabert modified the inboard tripod joints with integral stub axles to become flanged stub axles to work with the same type of CV joints used by GForce. Some vendors (including Zero EV) offer flanged stub shafts for Tesla transaxles that work with the same style of CV joints, and someone could custom-machine similar stubs for the Mach-E (but tooling that up for one project would be unreasonably expensive). That approach could be used to convert the Mach-E to work with aftermarket axle shaft assemblies.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Looking for comments on Ford’s Emulator motor in a Lotus 7.


What rear hub assemblies would you be using? Presumably this is a Lotus 7 style vehicle (a Caterham 7, or something just inspired by the design), rather than an actual Lotus 7 which came with a live beam axle in the rear.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Eluminator, thanks. I have built the first chassis for a solid “live”, the body is designed for independent, or more space as I figured modifications would be needed in the future. I was/am still planning a gas for the first attempt, as I like the idea of a motorcycle engine/trans. The ultimate is the electric, done right.
I am more concerned with quality and longevity, than anything to do with speed. The reason the 7 appeals (caterham/vt) is its very changeable, or one can add space or move things. Albeit the light weight nature of this car, and the summer top down, also the looks is what appeals to me.

One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.
A negative about the Ford is the brake, but…the front drive motor is likely sufficient for a lighter car so maybe that s the answer. I dont think the front is on offer yet, maybe Ford will release the package soon as they are seeing what’s happening in UK and USA.

Haven’t considered batteries or capacitors or both too much, really like the idea of a combination of the two. But that may be over the top.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

brian_ said:


> What rear hub assemblies would you be using? Presumably this is a Lotus 7 style vehicle (a Caterham 7, or something just inspired by the design), rather than an actual Lotus 7 which came with a live beam axle in the rear.


Thanks Brian, haven’t really considered it. I am sure, like you mention. Used or…doubt I am the first person to need/want them though! I also know space will be tight, which is why my 1st is going to be a bunch wider, and easy to modify. From memory, the Eluminator (thanks again!) is 22inch. So probably not too much travel in the rear, might need limiting straps or something, then again, might be just enough.

All very preliminary, though I suspect it is close to the right thing.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Thanks Brian, haven’t really considered it. I am sure, like you mention. Used or…doubt I am the first person to need/want them though! I also know space will be tight, which is why my 1st is going to be a bunch wider, and easy to modify. From memory, the Eluminator (thanks again!) is 22inch. So probably not too much travel in the rear, might need limiting straps or something, then again, might be just enough.
> 
> All very preliminary, though I suspect it is close to the right thing.


Yes, this is a coaxial drive unit so the outputs are spaced very widely, leaving little length for half-shafts in a narrow car, which could be a problem for wheel travel.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Yes, 20inches on either end is not much. Maybe I need to run the tyres at 30psi. Or…?


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.


It doesn't. Unlike an ICE that reduces fuel consumption when run at max pumping efficiency RPM, an electric is happy at high RPM. There is a sweet spot, but it's not low is good.

On my C5, it'd lope at 1500 RPM in 6th and get 31MPG. Electric, it'll be running about 6600 rpm, lol. Because...torque multiplication.

The Eluminator weighs about the same as a live beam axle, I'm guessing, as it's 205lb.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.


I understand that people want a neutral, but I'm not sure why it is considered important. No production EV with a single-ratio transmission has a neutral, and even the two-speeds don't necessarily have one.

The optimal speed for motor efficiency depends on load. It won't be the high-speed end of the motor's operating range, but it won't the be the low-speed end, either. Shifting to stay out of low-speed/high-load situations would probably save more energy than avoiding the extreme high-speed/low-load situation.


----------



## SMS (Sep 4, 2021)

Had a Birkin which is a Lotus 7 S3 like a Caterham. Weighed 1,167 lb wet and had 242 hp at the rear wheels. It was also as aerodynamic as a brick, lift off at 100mph and it feels like you hit the brakes. With the added weight due to the battery and the air resistance sucking up the juice not sure a Se7en would be the most fun EV.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

You don't need a lot of battery in a 1200 pound car or in a car that you'll run for an hour

As far as aero, if you're running on roads 50-80 mph is plenty of fun and will get you killed, no problem. My C5 pens out to 91 top speed (At 160, the noise level was unpleasant), but it did 1G in corners with no aero mods...couple that with a 0-60 below 3s with electric and tell me you can't have any more fun than that with your pants on.

NO

ADDED

WEIGHT

A purist would not mod a classic - that's what restomod is all about (my constraint is stock weight and balance and aero/widebody gets tacky awfully easily on a good looking classic), whereas someone pushing tech can easily solve the aero problems a brick poses. Just keeping air from going under the car makes a world of difference, as does how it exits from underneath it.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Building, 1st frame ready (ice engine), molds ready (Caterham or 10inches longer) and wider with more room for independent. And when a good, large company like Ford offers a crate that will fit and work. I will tweak the molds if necessary, and I will make some for my brothers and sisters. Mom and dad say they are too old for one, though dad still drives his 05 Elise so you never know.


----------



## SMS (Sep 4, 2021)

Understand the desire for a crate motor drop in. If for driving on the street an Eluminator might be a bit of overkill. Many 7 owners are very happy with Kent motors and an electric motor with similar power would be lighter and your tire budget would be much lower. When you wrote about the Eluminator I was thinking you were building a track car.
Elise 1,975 lbs, 190hp
Birkin, 1,200 lbs 
Kent motor 242 lbs, about 100hp
Eluminator, 205 lbs, 281hp
AC-51, 150lbs, 80hp


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

SMS said:


> Elise 1,975 lbs, 190hp
> Birkin, 1,200 lbs
> 
> Kent motor 242 lbs, about 100hp
> ...


Good numbers to have, but the weights need some context. The Kent engine needs a transmission and final drive, the AC-51 electric motor needs a final drive and possibly some additional reduction gearbox (usually a multi-speed transmission), and the Eluminator EV drive unit is complete with reduction gearing and final drive. And of course the electric motors are useless without a battery (plus an inverter, charger, etc) which will weigh substantially more than the motor, and much more than the engine's full fuel tank.

Assuming that the sevenesque car ends up almost as heavy as an Elise after conversion, the Eluminator is more powerful than required but something better than an AC-51 would certainly be desirable. 

An advantage of any complete EV drive it is that it can install entirely in the back (with an independent suspension - an important qualifier), leaving the original engine space for battery.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

It also depends on super/ultra capacitors. Still in its infancy, but. I do fancy capacitors. Hoping for 70-80 mile range.
Even though the Eluminator is 280hp, is there a need to use it all?
While I would likely prefer the Front Eluminator, its not offered as of yet.


----------



## SMS (Sep 4, 2021)

brian_ said:


> the Eluminator EV drive unit is complete with reduction gearing and final drive.


Had not considered that the Eluminator included the reduction gearing and final drive. That does make a difference. To me the fun of a 7 was always the light weight. Amazing how you can brake so late and trow it into a corner.

Need to change my thinking of what the 7 was like to what my Zero is like, all inclusive.



h20ham said:


> Hoping for 70-80 mile range.
> Even though the Eluminator is 280hp, is there a need to use it all?


With such poor aerodynamics you will need a lot of energy to have such a long range.
You will not need to use it all. My 7 had close to the same hp and about half the torque of the Eluminator when it was a track car. On the street it was not a lot of fun. Now some of this was due to it being an ICE car. I had to tip toe around corners and taking off. De tuned it quite a bit. My buddy that had a very similar car with a Kent in it had a better street car and in many ways track car. On the track he almost never had to lift as the car handled so well and could take corners that fast. On the street flooring it would not get you into trouble and just putting around was still a kick in the pants. Keep in mind compared with an Elise a 7 is lower, lighter, narrower, and you steer it with the throttle, wheel, brakes, and your butt

What may be a big difference is that the ICE motor had power and troque curves and an electric motor can be programed so it may be much easier to drive an EV se7en. It did take me some time to get used to my Zero. Still miss the clutch in some slow speed maneuvers.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

You will be weight constrained, so will be making a lot less HP with the Eluminator. That's where you're wise to wait for the smaller, even lighter, drive unit. The small front motor should be available from the parts department, not Ford Performance. Did you ask?

You also need to trade acceleration for top speed when making the battery pack. You won't get both and keep the weight constrained.

Supercaps are bullshit unless you want to pit every lap for a charge, lol.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> It also depends on super/ultra capacitors. Still in its infancy, but. I do fancy capacitors. Hoping for 70-80 mile range.


Capacitors for EV energy storage have never succeeded, because they just don't work very well. Part of the problem is that while batteries change in voltage by only a small fraction of their nominal voltage with a change in state of charge, fully discharging a capacitor means taking its voltage to zero (obviously not practical), so only part of the potential energy stored is usable.

There were some hybrid buses with capacitors instead of a battery, but their storage requirement is very short duration compared to a purely electric vehicle, and due to the size of the vehicle the peak power requirement is high.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Even though the Eluminator is 280hp, is there a need to use it all?


No, and there's no need to go to the expense and carry the weight of a larger unit than necessary.



h20ham said:


> While I would likely prefer the Front Eluminator, its not offered as of yet.


I doubt they're ever offer the much lower-powered Mach-E front drive unit as a "crate" item, for the same reason that they don't offer low-powered engines that way... it's a performance market. The "crate motor" style of product is only an advantage if it is offered with support for non-stock installations, and that isn't even true of the Eluminator yet... so you might as well salvage a suitable drive unit from a wrecked EV - they generally don't wear out so used is about as good as new.

Front units from various AWD EVs are possibilities, because the front unit is in some cases lower in power (and so smaller and lighter), although more are simply identical (in motor size and power) to the rear. The sole drive unit in a compact front wheel drive EV would generally be reasonably sized. Even the electric drive unit from one end of a plug-in hybrid which has engine driving one axle and electric-only for the other axle is a possibility, for a very light car.

Due to very limited available space, a drive unit for the rear of a sevenesque car will probably fit best if the motor is coaxial with the axles, placing the motor on the axle line instead of ahead of or behind it. Both Mach-E units are coaxial (although they're otherwise unrelated designs from different suppliers), as are the Chevrolet Spark and Bolt, Porsche Taycan front, and others... but the units with the best aftermarket/DIY support (Tesla induction motors and the Nissan Volt unit) are not coaxial.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

The problem is that most of the AWD Mach-E's are hard front-hits (that horsepower in excess of driving skill thing again). If they're not hit hard, they get bid high and repaired for resale in this crazy used car market.

The prices at salvage yards are equal to or higher than the parts department because they know these are backordered items. A conversion person doesn't care about a 3 month order leadtime. An insurance company's claimant sure does.

You CAN get parts for Mach-E from your neighborhood Ford parts department, including the front unit. Probably never from Ford Performance, but who cares if the price is the same or less at yor Ford dealer, which it appears to be.

The front unit is also small enough to where you have lots of inverter options out there to run it. So, that's not a showstopper.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> You CAN get parts for Mach-E from your neighborhood Ford parts department, including the front unit. Probably never from Ford Performance, but who cares if the price is the same or less at yor Ford dealer, which it appears to b


Right, tried here in Canada. Maybe the dealer called Performance. I will try again. Thanks


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Nope. Dealer needs to look up the car and the part on the diagram, just as if you were getting a PCV for a 1970 Tbird. Do not ask for the Eluminator or the crate.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Yes, front motor a reasonable price. Don’t know yet on the Traction Controller though


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

What did they quote you and got a part number so your post can live on in infamy?


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

I run a fleet of Ford trucks, so I get a good deal.
I will check part # on Tasca today, and post it.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

But its just the front drive motor, no indication of Traction unit, only something with the first 3 being a PCM


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

The front traction inverter part number for Mach-E, is *LJ9Z7B012C*

$1210.46 USD from Lakeland Ford in Florida

plus $250 core charge

*Fits:*

Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T AWD First Edition Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T AWD GT Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T AWD Premium Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T AWD Select Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T RWD California Route 1 Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T RWD Premium Sport Utility 2021Ford Mustang Mach-E -L - cylinder ELECTRIC A/T RWD Select Sport Utility 2

Edit: it fits the GT, and the GT Performance isn't out yet as far as parts is concerned


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Rear drive unit LJ9Z7C629A, which has the inverter mounted on it (the inverter does not mount on the crate motor). 

$4687.97 at Lakeland. Not sure if there's a core charge.

Still looking for front


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Interesting. The two drive units, big (GT Performance) and small (GT) are shown, but I can't drill down for part numbers at Lakeland. Will try elsewhere:









Here's what's interesting.... the CRATE "motor" is the FRONT GTP drive (Number 2), not the rear GT/GTP drive. The rear drive part number I gave, in the prior posting, has the inverter stack on it -- it's the rear motor ONLY in the Mach-E.

The case is different between front and rear, even though they are rated the same power. The inverter does not mount on either front motor (Number 1 small or Number 2 large)...

Is the same inverter used for both front variants?

Frikkin Alice in Wonderland Rabbit Hole this is 😬

edit: from my travels, DU number 1 is not made by BorgWarner


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

No luck. They all use the idiot-consumer-facing web page now.

You have the front diagram now. You're after the small motor, Number 1 assembly in the diagram:










It's smaller, though width may be the same as I think both _maybe_ use the same axles.

The inverter seems mounted elsewhere and has cable running to the front DU.

A good parts counter person can sort this out. I'm busy tomorrow or I'd follow up.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Wow, good stuff Dr @remy_martian 
Think the good # for the front is Lj9z7b000a
The price in Canuckleland is more like $3k, so well worth the cross-border shopping!


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

The drive (splines) shafts are integral, so tough to get the length. May need to order one and pay the % restocking fee.


remy_martian said:


> LJ9Z7B012C


I suspect Summit Racing etc offer the $3k drive unit as the rear. 









Ford teases 'Eluminator' electric crate motor


Ford parts catalogue to offer big watts alongside big blocks




www.whichcar.com.au





Most of the web sites point to the Rear Drive, suspect the drive unit is configured? Comments please.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Electric Lotus Seven

That is basically what "Duncan's Dubious Device" is
I'm at 800 kg (I overbuilt it a lot) - with about 500 hp

My 14 kWh gives me a comfortable 50 km range at highway speed - and I'm not using the very top or bottom of the charge
the 14 kWh Chevy Volt modules are 133 kg
for 80 miles range - 130 km - you would need about 35 kWh - and 332 kg

That's 200 kg extra - do you really NEED that much range?

I looked at my use and found that 50 km was great for 90% of the time but if I was needing more then I needed at least 150 km

My Device has a Hitach forklift motor - if I was starting again I would probably put a Nissan Leaf unit in the back









Duncan's Dubious Device


The floor and bulkheads have been brazed into the chassis Shouldn't that read "bronzed"? ;) Any updates?




www.diyelectriccar.com


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> The drive (splines) shafts are integral, so tough to get the length. May need to order one and pay the % restocking fee.
> 
> I suspect Summit Racing etc offer the $3k drive unit as the rear.
> 
> ...


No. The Summit and Ford Performance Eluminator, as shown in the drawings, is the large front unit found only in the GT Peformance. It has no provision to mount the inverter on it like the actual rear unit. It does have the same motor inside the unit, though, based on specs.

The websites copy & regurgitate. They are wrong about it being the rear unit. It's not.

Look at the Summit unit and the big FRONT unit sketch (Assembly Number 2) from the parts catalog. Identical. No inverter attached.

The rear assembly I gave you the PN and price for you has the inverter mounted on top like a Leaf, Bolt, Prius, etc.

There is one separate inverter for the front that I could find and it has cables that go to the front motor. Probably did not have the headroom to mount it on top.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

I guess I should ask the mods to kindly move all this Mach-E stuff over to the Eluminator topic. Sorry for the threadjack.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> Wow, good stuff Dr @remy_martian
> Think the good # for the front is Lj9z7b000a
> The price in Canuckleland is more like $3k, so well worth the cross-border shopping!


Yup - that's the small unit. $ 2,738.47 plus $500 core charge from Lakeland Ford. Remember that the inverter is a separate unit and priced separately - I gave that info out earlier here.

Can you get the part number and price for the large unit as well? It's only found in the Mustang Mach-E GT Performance model (idiotic amateur hour branding, imo...might as well have named it in German 😂 ).


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Crap, I’ve been throwing Canuckle prices on a predominately USA site, subtract 1/3$ From my figures



Duncan said:


> That's 200 kg extra - do you really NEED that much range?


Likely, as we live in a remote area. The next town is 70km with some good charging by shopping, but that is questionable as you can not book a charging station for a shopping day.



remy_martian said:


> No. The Summit and Ford Performance Eluminator, as shown in the drawings, is the large front unit found only in the GT Peformance. It has no provision to mount the inverter on it like the actual rear unit. It does have the same motor inside the unit, though, based on specs.


I will get dimensions from Ford, it looks to me like the quoted 270hp from Summit and Performance is the rear unit. As I recall the front is 100 or so hp, which again, may not be sufficient for 1000kg. Then again, as I haven’t read Duncans build thread in years. I cant recall where the weight, or added strength to the chassis is from. Maybe it really is mostly battery weight.

Kind Regards
Jim


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> Rear drive unit LJ9Z7C629A, which has the inverter mounted on it (the inverter does not mount on the crate motor).
> 
> $4687.97 at Lakeland. Not sure if there's a core charge.
> 
> Still looking for front


$3,8xx USA from Summit








Ford Performance Parts M-9000-MACHE Ford Performance Parts Eluminator Mach E Electric Motors | Summit Racing


Free Shipping - Ford Performance Parts Eluminator Mach E Electric Motors with qualifying orders of $99. Shop Electric Vehicle Drive Motors at Summit Racing.




www.summitracing.com


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

No. There are two front units. The AWD GT is the small DU of 100-ish HP.

The larger DU, which has the same output as the rear can only be found in the GT Performance Model, which car is not in the wild yet that I can tell. That front motor is the crate...the inverter cannot mount integrally on top of it (look at the sketches/drawings at Summit).

The crate was shown at SEMA. She and he both mention "GT Performance powertrain"






It is definitely NOT the rear unit. It is definitely not the small front unit in salvage cars today.

This one sold this morning, RWD:










Shipping's gunna be fun to the UK.

I suspect one of our Lotus 7 people here? 😂


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> $3,8xx USA from Summit
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You're not paying attention

Apples and oranges.

The Ford Performance (Summit) "crate motor" unit does not have the integrated inverter on top, which is included on that rear unit Ford part number. (edit: not that the Ford parts rear unit with inverter has a $500 core charge adder to that price, the Ford Performance unit has no core charge).

The Summit unit as shown is the Front LARGE unit only available on the GT Performance car. On the Mach-E forum, it looks like nobody's taken delivery of one yet, so it may not be in the Ford parts catalog, though the parts drawings show it as Drive unit assembly number 2.

The large unit has a not-included cable from the not-included FRONT INVERTER that plugs into it.

It's not clear you can control the rear inverter with whatever inverter hacks will be available for the front inverter from Ford Performance.

I'm also not sure the car that was purchased at auction this morning has enough left of it to sniff CAN codes. Oh well -- the battery is worth the money.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> No. There are two front units. The AWD GT is the small DU.


From what I can get from Ford there is only two. Better double check



Car-Part.com--Used Auto Parts Market




2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







FRONT,ALL ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,LESS INVERTER,MACH-E, SELECT,New IIHS Test Vehicle,'000,300'Actual Miles1,000​A​2105180$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







REAR,ALL ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,MACH-E,SELECT, 'New IIHS Test Veh '300'Actual Miles'1,000​A​2105180$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







FRONT,ALL ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,LESS INVERTER,MACH-E,SELECT, 'New IIHS Test Veh'300'Actual Miles'1,000​A​2105181$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







REAR,ALL ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,LESS INVERTER,MACH-E,SELECT New IIHS Test Car,'300'Actual Miles(ASSEMBLY ADDITIONAL $$$)1,000​A​2105181$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







FRONT,ALL-ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,LESS INVERTER,4DR,MACH-E,SELECT, 'New IIHS Test Veh'240'Actual Miles'1,000​A​210554$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







FRONT,ALL-ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,LESS INVERTER,MACH-E,PREMIUM, 'New IIHS Test Veh'17'Actual Miles'1,000​A​210557$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







REAR,ALL-ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,MACH-E,PREMIUM, 'New IIHS Test Veh'17'Actual Miles'1,000​A​210557$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote
2027​2021
Engine Assembly
Ford Mustang Mach E







REAR,ALL-ELECTRIC,AT(single spd),AWD,4DR,MACH-E,SELECT, 'New IIHS Test Veh'240'Actual Miles'1,000​A​210554$3500​M and M Service and Salvage Yard Inc. USA-VA(Ruckersville) Request_Quote 800-533-4099 / 800-248-6161 Request_Insurance_Quote


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

There are 8 on Car-part now

About 13 on CoPart 






Copart USA - Online Live Vehicle Auctions - Bid & Win


Leader in live online salvage and insurance auto auctions. Over 100000 vehicles on sale. Salvage, used cars, trucks, construction equipment, fleet and more.



www.copart.com


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

And a dozen on 
iaai


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Yeah, and they usually auction for >$30 grand, lol


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Crap, I’ve been throwing Canuckle prices on a predominately USA site, subtract 1/3$ From my figures


Just put "CAD" after them - let people do their own conversions, which change in rate with currency markets anyway. There are people in this forum from every inhabited continent; there's no standard currency.

Also, cost of parts is different in different countries, even from the same supplier and after adjusting for currency. Converting the price in Canada from Canadian dollars to US dollars does not result in the price in the U.S.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> No. There are two front units. The AWD GT is the small DU of 100-ish HP.
> 
> The larger DU, which has the same output as the rear can only be found in the GT Performance Model, which car is not in the wild yet that I can tell. That front motor is the crate...the inverter cannot mount integrally on top of it (look at the sketches/drawings at Summit).
> 
> ...


Excellent catch!

Although it's not obvious why Ford did this, they may have thought that for the crate market a separately mounted inverter would have packaging advantages, or that buyers would use an aftermarket inverter.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> There is one separate inverter for the front that I could find and it has cables that go to the front motor. Probably did not have the headroom to mount it on top.


The front of the Mach-E has a subframe which mounts the ancillary bits, such as the charger. The top of that frame may be too low for the inverter to mount on the motor. Also, the non-BorgWarner front motor (as shown in the Munro Live teardown videos) is a Magna unit; if the Magna drive unit was not available with integrally mounted inverter, Ford may have specified a separate inverter for both front units for consistency of packaging.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

The headscratcher is that it appears there's only one front inverter for both drives. 

So the Magna is severely overrating the inverter (read $$). 

A buddy of mine worked for Ford and he said they nitpicked the cost of every bolt and washer. 

Why would they use the high powered inverter from a low production run model for their jellybean AWD front motor? Time to market and unit qualification are the only reasons I can think of and that front inverter will be in their gunsights for cost reduction and supply chain reasons, imo.

Speaking of Munro....the electronics-illiterate hypocrite crucified the rear unit inverter construction, yet it's pretty much the same cooling technique used in the Prius (surprise, Denso supplies both), as well denigrating the cooling methods on a motor with a near-solid stator winding fill (including the liquid-liquid heat exchanger, then he leans on the one on the Tesla DU he praised).


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Ive tried my Ford guy again, he claims there is 5 motors total.
I bet like most companies, costs are where its at. So maybe the F150 Lightning and the larger vehicles get the rear and large front. I need to find a Vin of a GT so I can get the last part numbers


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> Speaking of Munro....the electronics-illiterate hypocrite crucified the rear unit inverter construction, yet it's pretty much the same cooling technique used in the Prius (surprise, Denso supplies both), as well denigrating the cooling methods on a motor with a near-solid stator winding fill (including the liquid-liquid heat exchanger, then he leans on the one on the Tesla DU he praised).


Sandy Munro must be good at something - he has built a consulting business - but it clearly isn't automotive technology. I do appreciate the teardown videos, but the audio is mostly pointless. I recommend these videos to people who want to see details that are not visible from other sources (because reasonable people don't destructively disassemble their vehicles), but not as a source of technical information from the narration.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Ive tried my Ford guy again, he claims there is 5 motors total.
> I bet like most companies, costs are where its at. So maybe the F150 Lightning and the larger vehicles get the rear and large front. I need to find a Vin of a GT so I can get the last part numbers


There are clearly not five Mach-E motors, but there are multiple power ratings with the same motors, determined by battery capacity.

The Lightning motors will likely all be different from the Mach-E motors, but one of the BorgWarner Mach-E units does get used in another model... the E-Transit. That's another online parts listing to check... the E-Transit is a 2022 model and has been in test users' hands for a while, but I don't think that regular customer deliveries have started.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

There are likely five combos of the three "motors" to look up:

1. RWD with inverter
2. AWD, w front Magna
3. AWD, w front BW
4. "Crate" front BW
5. Maybe RWD/AWD rear without inverter


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> Ive tried my Ford guy again, he claims there is 5 motors total.
> I bet like most companies, costs are where its at. So maybe the F150 Lightning and the larger vehicles get the rear and large front. I need to find a Vin of a GT so I can get the last part numbers


According to the Mach-E forums, the GT Performance are not built yet, so no VIN code yet. Yeah, I went down that rabbit hole as well last night.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

The value in what Munro does is he's an IP intermediary. I'd bet he doesn't cite one patent in his reports. 

I'd also bet no engineer worth their salt gives a f*ck about his child-level opinion (in electronics they border on asinine, imo) and screw counting...that's why we have internal design reviews before we release any design. Those can be brutal -- you see mild versions of it here from some of us....but it's appreciated input at DR's by designers and is no place for snowflakes. Mistakes are very costly. Omissions can complely miss an opportunity window.

I'd also bet the Chinese eat his stuff up, since there's no trail of crumbs exportwise.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> also bet the Chinese eat his stuff up, since there's no trail of crumbs exportwise


Though the Ford offering is cheap, suppose China could still make it cheaper and keep a few CEO’s well paid.
My parts guy was sure on 5, like you say, probably a combination and controls etc


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

China being cheap is a myth that flew out the window about 5 years ago. 

The BW drives are Hecho en Mexico and are just as inexpensive to make, especially now with sea-shipping gone through the roof and totally constipated in ports like Long Beach - one reason the US is flipping China off now.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

h20ham said:


> Then again, as I haven’t read Duncans build thread in years. I cant recall where the weight, or added strength to the chassis is from. Maybe it really is mostly battery weight.
> 
> Kind Regards
> Jim


The battery is 133 kg
The motor is 105 kg
So that is about 240 kg out of 800 kg

The rest is the chassis - the running gear (Subaru) and the bodywork (basic)

I am using the front and rear subframes from the Subaru - not light!

Looking back on it I think I could lose 150 kg


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Your ugliest pic of the day:










Not only is the large DU deep and high with respect to axle centerline, even without the inverter, "motor" mounts for the crate motor expect two "hockey pucks" mounting to the top of the DU case. As thin as that case is, it may not handle vertical loading anywhere else.

That's what happens to engineering designs when there's no adult supervision.

Don't get me wrong - that chassis metalwork is beauty art.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> Your ugliest pic of the day:
> 
> View attachment 126149
> 
> ...


That actually looks like a very nice fit to a sevenesque design in packaging and structure.

The image appears to have been posted to Facebook by MLe Racecars. Here's another view of their display unit (another of their images cropped down), which puts the drive unit in better context:








I think the biggest concern in a sevenesque car is the width.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Agreed, though 20” is probably just enough-barely.
I know my 1960’s Élan’s 1/2 shafts are about 20”


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

MLe built the electric 1978 Ford pickup that appeared at the last SEMA show - used the guts from the GT Performance, which don't exist yet...

I still don't like the member going over the motor...


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> I still don't like the member going over the motor...


In isolation, it looks structurally inefficient. In the Mach-E, that crossmember also supports the ancillary equipment (charger, etc) and makes a lot more sense. The same sort of structure is used in the E-Transit, again supporting the ancillary equipment, but in that case there is only the spare tire under it.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

It's actually structurally efficient in that it braces the torsion in the frame from the suspension. Just that it may protrude into the trunk for some RWD conversions...

With the Silverado EV announcement, maybe we'll see a Hummer/Silverado crate motor soon? 

Eluminator is eating their lunch since SEMA and the Bolt DU ain't cutting the mustard.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> Just that it may protrude into the trunk for some RWD conversions...


Yes, but fortunately for sevenesque builders, this is not a concern.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> With the Silverado EV announcement, maybe we'll see a Hummer/Silverado crate motor soon?
> 
> Eluminator is eating their lunch since SEMA and the Bolt DU ain't cutting the mustard.


The Bolt motor is 150 kW; the large Mach-E motor is 200 kW. They both have coaxial transaxles. They're a lot more alike than they are different.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

And why wouldn’t most use this method. Seems the obvious evolution to me.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> And why wouldn’t most use this method. Seems the obvious evolution to me.


Which method - the coaxial transaxle layout? GM used it in the Spark EV before the Bolt, and it is various other current EVs. The coaxial layout packages well, but spreads the axle outputs far apart so it forces short axle shafts. It works for wide cars in typical use, and even in the relatively narrow Bolt, but it would be less desirable for anything needing a long-travel suspension in a moderate track width.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Sure, the coaxial keeps the weight low, and as far as i can tell more of a tight package.
I haven’t played with any of them yet, seeing what you experts figure would be a good start!

Kind Regards
Jim


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

^^^ Patents is one reason.

Cost may be another.



brian_ said:


> The Bolt motor is 150 kW; the large Mach-E motor is 200 kW. They both have coaxial transaxles. They're a lot more alike than they are different.


That's an extra 150 amps through the inverter and motor, for starters. While they're just numbers, we stick weld at 110amps on 1/8 steel, lol

My old Trailblazer also uses coaxial axles - through the oil pan, so meh. The Bolt uses helical gear reduction, the BW uses a novel planetary setup that did not impress our man Sandy...the 1700's steam engine geartrain on the Tesla DU had him in love.

Bolt & BW are different beasts entirely and that 60kW power output difference can change many design choices to keep weight and package volume down.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> My old Trailblazer also uses coaxial axles - through the oil pan, so meh.


Coaxial with what? In this case, the axle shafts are coaxial with the motor. I don't know how that would apply to the Trailblazer. Yes, one of the Trailblazer's axle shafts goes through the pan - not sure how that is relevant.



remy_martian said:


> The Bolt uses helical gear reduction, the BW uses a novel planetary setup...


Yes, the Bolt's reduction gearing is probably less expensive than the planetary setup, and has the same effect. The planetary system is fine, but not in any way novel; most coaxial units are probably planetary, and even GM's Spark EV (that's the temporary model which was replaced by the Bolt) had planetary reduction. The Mach-E's planetary gearset is a compound design, but that has been common for decades.



remy_martian said:


> Bolt & BW are different beasts entirely and that 60kW power output difference can change many design choices to keep weight and package volume down.


Sure... and in some cases that might make the Bolt the better choice. It's just strange that Ford listed an EV drive unit in the crate motor catalog, with zero technical support and no way to make it work, and somehow that is supposed to make it something more special than every other EV manufacturer's similar drive units which also have no support for non-stock applications.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

We don't know if there's technical support from Ford...did you ask? 

Would be asinine to sell a "crate" unit without documentation - the pinout, for example. 

How did MLe build that 1978 F100 truck without tech support?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> Sure, the coaxial keeps the weight low, and as far as i can tell more of a tight package.


Other drive units typically (including the Leaf and various Teslas) are just as low as a coaxial unit, because they place the motor at the axle height (just like a coaxial unit), but ahead of or behind the axle line. The coaxial layout is a tighter package, but not lower.

Regardless of whether the mechanical layout has coaxial shafts or not, the inverter and other components may be stacked on top of the motor, beside it, or remotely mounted.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

remy_martian said:


> We don't know if there's technical support from Ford...did you ask?


I didn't ask. The Ford Performance web page for the product says "Instruction Sheet: Not Available". One of the crate engines with the same note also says "For FEAD and control pack information, please contact the Ford Performance Techline"... so maybe someone should call the Ford Performance Techline and ask them what is available for the Eluminator; who knows, they might have encoder pinout and schematic, motor winding inductance and rotor inertia so an inverter can be configured, specs for required lubricant and coolant, etc. ("FEAD" is just Front End Accessory Drive). 



remy_martian said:


> Would be asinine to sell a "crate" unit without documentation - the pinout, for example.


I agree. That doesn't mean it doesn't occur.



remy_martian said:


> How did MLe build that 1978 F100 truck without tech support?


MLe is not a consumer; it is a company which exhibits at SEMA and attracts press attention. What they get for support is unrelated to what any of us would get. For all I know, they may have done a complete transplant (including the inverters which Ford Performance doesn't offer) in the best of DIY Electric Car fashion with no support at all.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

No pin outs or much


----------



## Deane (Mar 21, 2020)

h20ham said:


> From what I can get from Ford there is only two. Better double check
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am really curious why all these e-Mustangs have such low mileage at crash time! Are they so irresistibly fast that you just have to go wreck that $50K(US) car as soon as you can?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

Deane said:


> I am really curious why all these e-Mustangs have such low mileage at crash time! Are they so irresistibly fast that you just have to go wreck that $50K(US) car as soon as you can?


They're new, so all Mach-E's have low mileage. And no, they're not that fast.

But in this case, all of the listings include "New IIHS Test Veh" in the description, which means that this is a batch of cars which were crash-tested by IIHS; of course those have not been used much.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

300 miles on some, Brian.

Accountants and Librarians can't handle 600hp.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

h20ham said:


> No pin outs or much


Throttle position is in ABS, then?


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

remy_martian said:


> Throttle position is in ABS, then?


the only ABS i see reference too is brakes. Maybe then?
like many cars, on, off or wot!


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Maybe Ford has a PWM motor control patent?

Pedal WOT Modulation

Seriously, which module issues TPS messaging?


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

Wish they would say, I’ve asked service also. So no help from parts, or service. Getting frustrated. They both claim neither can get any more information from Ford…
question is, if the thing sold out. There must be a bunch out there. I cant find any chat about them


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

ECOClassics from the UK


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> No pin outs or much


Out of the context of the rest of the manual, the alphabet soup is a bit daunting. This is what I found:
ISC: Inverter System Controller
S-ISC: Secondary Inverter System Controller​SOBDM: Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Module
SOBDM-C: Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Module - C​SOBDMB: Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Module - B​GWM: GateWay Module
APIM: Accessory Protocol Interface Module
BCM: Body Control Module
BCMC: Body Control Module - C​BECM: Battery Energy Control Module
ECM: Engine Control Module

I assume that non-networked connections to most modules are not shown in this schematic; few if any of the modules could function with only a CAN connection, and other diagrams in the same manual should confirm this and provide details. An ECM in an EV is interesting - it may be an EV-specific variant to accept the accelerator input and similar I/O, then direct (by CAN message) the inverter system controllers. If so, the ECM would be required, in addition to the ISC, to control an Eluminator using Ford control components.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> ECOClassics from the UK
> View attachment 126555
> View attachment 126556


That's the sensible layout if making modern EV components fit in a Sevenesque chassis. 

*ECO*Classics is an EV conversion company - not a chassis builder - so it's not their chassis. What chassis is it? The dash hoops of the frame are interesting - very much a two-cockpit effect.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

On the subject of how to control the inverter-less Eluminator, this is what I noted in the Eluminator news thread:


brian_ said:


> AEM Electronics mentioned (as an aside in a YouTube video about an unrelated project) that an Eluminator installation which was at the SEMA show used a Cascadia inverter, borrowed from AEM's project.
> See 1:45 in Our '71 Pinzgauer EV Conversion is FINALLY Coming Together!
> They mentioned a team working with Ford, so although a consumer probably gets no information or support, a commercial operation building something for a show promoting Ford gets assistance.


None of the Ford controls matter if you use the Eluminator as a bare motor with encoder, connected to a non-Ford inverter.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

For which they allegedly do not provide a pinout...


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

An autoevolution article mentions some of the Mach-E modules:
Early 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E Models Discharge 12V Battery Over Software Issue
The article text mentions the "powertrain control module", without an acronym; my guess is that it is the ECM in the diagram posted earlier. The attached Ford Technical Service Bulletin (TSB ) calls it the PCM, but my guess is that the acronym used depends on the vintage of the documentation; ECM makes sense for consistency with other models, but any reference to an "engine" in an EV will be confusing.


----------



## remy_martian (Feb 4, 2019)

Tesla has never recalled their cars over completely F'ing the 12V battery


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

brian_ said:


> That's the sensible layout if making modern EV components fit in a Sevenesque chassis.
> 
> *ECO*Classics is an EV conversion company - not a chassis builder - so it's not their chassis. What chassis is it? The dash hoops of the frame are interesting - very much a two-cockpit effect.


I didn’t ask, and I am not sure in the UK with the DMVL how it all works. But folk have been building 7 chassis for 70+ years now.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> But folk have been building 7 chassis for 70+ years now.


Yes, and one result is that among cars including those loosely referred to as "Lotus 7" style or inspired or whatever, there are many variations in design, some of which are unlike (in the details) any real Lotus/Caterham 7. A common area for differences is the rear suspension, which is highly relevant to using a drive unit placed in the rear; it wouldn't work with a live beam axle and I wouldn't want to try it with a de Dion axle. 

I was really just curious about the structure of this one, and couldn't find the images on the EcoClassics website, or anywhere on the web via Google Image Search... it's not important.


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

They just got to this stage recently, looks good!


----------



## kelsobobj (6 mo ago)

has anyone found a sorce for control unit to hook up to factory traction inverter bob


----------



## h20ham (Feb 22, 2019)

A 7
0-60mph in 1.46


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

h20ham said:


> A 7
> 0-60mph in 1.46


It's impressively quick, but how relevant is it? It's not a Lotus 7 or even similar to one.


----------

