# Planning Standing Cargo Van (Ford Transit or Dodge Promaster) conversion



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

Oh, budget:

Obviously, I'd like it as cheap as possible. That being said, I'd really love to be able to pull this off (just the batteries/motor/body basic functionality) for $30k. (Can spend more on Solar/Generator/Interior/Motorcycle mount stuff after that, according to price/weight/discussions on how much value I'm really adding.)

As for time:

I have a guy who has been wanting to learn/try converting a vehicle to electric for years. He's able to weld, and has a full garage of kit for this, and is very savvy in electrical and mechanical work, so that's a plus. I'd like to be able to be on the road in 4 months, maximum 6 months, so advice on reaching those targets are welcome.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Solar - lots of room to cover the roof, how good could this get? We talking maybe 10-20 miles of range charge per day, or could it be even better?


Let's say the roof area is about 2 metres by 4 metres, so that's 8 square metres. Insolation (the amount of solar energy hitting the earth's surface) is very roughly 1 kW/m2 at noon in clear weather, so that's 8 kW. A solar cell is 20% efficient if you're lucky, so that much panel area could ideally produce 1.6 kW. Over a day in clear weather you might get the equivalent of four hours of full sun (actually 12 hours, but mostly not direct as the angle to the sun changes) so at the equator the van might collect 5 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of energy. That's enough to drive perhaps 10 km (6 miles)... and it's a highly optimistic and ideal estimate.

Also, in an RV situation you will need energy to live (ventilation, lighting, cooking...), and much of what you can get from a rooftop array will go to that. I think rooftop panels are a great idea - I just don't think that it's reasonable to expect to drive anywhere on energy collected that way.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> I am thinking 100-160kwh in battery, maybe just laid in the floor of the cargo area of the van itself?





fintip said:


> How hard will it be to make sure I'm not going to be at risk walking around on top of these batteries of causing issues (that is, how much weight will it take to have enough materials to make it ok to walk on top of)? Should I consider installing them differently?


You can't walk on a battery, or even on a floor panel supported by a battery. This would mean building a complete structural floor above the cargo floor, making a space between them for the battery. That would take a lot of height, so even the tallest of these vans would then be short of headroom.

I suggest trying to find a way to put the battery under the floor, or at least in the base of cabinets (such as seating).


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> *Generator in Engine Bay Idea:*
> An interesting idea I had... how about putting a generator in the engine bay and hooking it up to the built in gas tank? I know it won't charge the batteries faster than they deplete or anything, but could be run while driving to give extended range, and if run while parked would be quieted by being in engine bay, and allow essentially keeping a reserve-self-charging option--combined with the solar panels, it might give some kind of decent emergency option, no? Is this completely hare-brained?


That would work, and if you must carry a generator in an EV under the hood is a good place for it; however, if you drive it as a series hybrid that's likely to be less efficient than just driving with the original engine.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Am worried about weight; ripping engine and transmission and driveshaft out but adding electric motor and lots of batteries is going to be a significant net increase in weight, no?


Yes, with a large battery there will be a significant increase in weight. Fortunately, a properly equipped commercial van has a lot more payload than needed for a basic RV interior, so it can also carry substantial battery weight.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

*Van Comparison*



fintip said:


> I decided to go the boxy euro-van style route. Thing is, mechnically I don't trust them, and they're expensive. Cheapest worn out ones are $15k, one with reasonably low miles would be at least $25k, and would require a bit of hunting. I decided best option would be a Transit--seemed the least unreliable...
> 
> *Body*
> I had been thinking Transit, since it was the best compromise of price/reliability, but the other options...
> ...


I don't think they're bad in general, but as with any vehicle there are weak points. The Transit uses a flex coupling (or "Guibo joint") at the transmission output, and that regularly dies. You can just replace it, and live with the unnecessary maintenance item because someone went cheap and didn't specify a proper CV joint.

Parts cost with anything wearing a "Mercedes" badge would be a concern in North America, but my real concern with a Sprinter would be rust. Just judging from what I see on the street, the first-generation Sprinter has the worst rust problems of any vehicle built by any manufacturer in this century - if I worked for Mercedes, I would be embarrassed.

Whatever the dimension differences, the huge difference between the ProMaster (which is a Fiat Ducato) and the others (in the versions sold in North America) is that the Promaster is front wheel drive and the others are rear wheel drive (with optional four wheel drive), so the mechanical layout and the underfloor structure are different.



fintip said:


> Transit is FWD, Ram is RWD.


It's the other way around, although the complete situation is more complex.

The Ram *ProMaster* is FWD, with a transversely mounted engine and transaxle. The Fiat Ducato on which it is based is also available AWD, but the Ram version is not.
The *Transit *is made is both FWD (transverse engine) and RWD (longitudinal engine) versions, but the FWD is only used in the lighter models and only the RWD is sold in North America as far as I know. There is also an AWD, based on the RWD.
The *Sprinter *has been RWD, with optional AWD based on the RWD. A FWD version was recently added, only for the 2019 model year, only in some variants, and I don't think it's available in North America.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

*Energy Consumption*



fintip said:


> Then I heard that Ford is about to release an electric version of the Transit! Looked into it--taking orders July, 43k after tax credit makes it pricey, and range is low at 108 miles (with a 64kwh battery, though I also think I read it was determined they would be about 30% less efficient than comparable tesla battery-to-motor) for the high roof option.


I don't know what you really mean by efficiency. If you mean that energy consumption would be 30% higher per distance travelled than a Tesla... well of course it will be much higher, because there is no comparable Tesla. Tesla doesn't make enormous vans. It doesn't matter what battery and what motor you use, this van will take much more energy to drive than a car due mostly to the aerodynamic drag (but also due to the weight).


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> *Mounting a Motorcycle:*
> I'd like to mount a light motorcycle to the front of the vehicle onto a front-mounted tow-hitch. This will add weight (though if batteries are in the back, that weight will help balance it out and improve ride I think), and hurt aerodynamics. Idea is it means when parked I don't have to drive the house around everywhere if the weather is OK, and having a second vehicle is a godsend in many possible scenarios. I'm unsure how high the impact will be on range from this, though. Mounting on back would prevent opening doors and spare tire, and towing obviously adds far more complexity that I'm striving to avoid.


I understand the logic, and I agree that having a very small vehicle makes some sense - it's like a yacht with a tender or dinghy. But...

None of these vehicles are intended to support a load up front. I doubt you'll find a front-mounted hitch receiver for any of them.

Even if you find or build something, a motorcycle will block the headlights, marker lights, and turn signals.

Maybe embrace the idea of pedalling?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

For an idea of how to package components in an EV conversion of a van, this article shows how Ford arranged the E-Transit:
The New 2022 Ford e-Transit Will Carry the Spare Under the Front, More Details are Revealed

They chose RWD, despite having a FWD version available and needing a new independent rear suspension to allow RWD with the battery in the middle, probably because with all of that battery weight the vehicle will be rear-heavy in use. The space under the hood is mostly used up with all of the electronics needed, plus the spare tire.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> *Motor*
> The E-Transit will be about 240hp. Seems like any single Tesla motor would get the job done.
> ...
> I'm thinking for weight savings it's worth it to try to engineer the Tesla on-axle option into the rear of whatever vehicle I go with. Any other motors I should be considering?


A single Tesla Model S or Model X motor might overheat in use. They are capable of putting out lots of power, but not much continuously because the rotor gets too hot. A Model 3 motor - although rated at lower peak power - might be a better choice.

The motor from any of the heavier production EVs is worth considering, if you have a way to control it.

Since all production EVs mount the motor at or adjacent to the driven axle, used with an independent suspension, all production EV drive units (motor plus transaxle) can potentially work at the front (if the van's suspension allows for driven axles) or at the rear (if you are willing to convert the van to an independent rear suspension).


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

*Extreme idea: tractor-based RV*

It is common in Europe to build what we could call a Class C motorhome (using a commercial truck or van cab and chassis with an RV body) by using what Mercedes calls a "tractor head" and Fiat calls a "tractor cab": the front of a front-wheel-drive van, just to the back of the cab, with a rear frame and rear suspension built for this purpose (not using the van's rear structure or chassis at all) and the RV body on that. This allows the motorhome designer maximum flexibility in designing the rear structure to hit the desired floor height and to accommodate RV components such as tanks.

This was the method used by Winnebago to build the LeSharo (using a Renault Trafic tractor) and later the Rialta (using a VW EuroVan, a.k.a. Transporter T4). You could even EV convert one of those motorhomes, instead of both converting a newer van to an EV and converting it to an RV. Currently none are sold in North America as far as I know, but they're common in Europe using the Ducato tractor and AL-KO rear chassis.
Here are EuroVan tractor cabs hilariously bolted together in pairs so they can be handled for shipping, at the Winnebago factory a couple of decades ago (courtesy RialtaInfo):









In an EV conversion RV, this approach might allow for everything wanted to fit under the floor - both the high-voltage battery and the tanks (fresh water and waste) - because you can pick the depth and configuration of the underfloor space. The drive motor could go in place of the engine, or in the rear. Because the original powertrain is not being used, this could even be done by cutting off a RWD van, but it would be easier for structural integrity to use a "tractor" which is already cut off and prepared for a rear frame to be bolted on... and the factory would only do that with a FWD van.

Of course this sort of thing will look like a motorhome, rather than a cargo van, unless you make a point of making it look like a cube van. I don't know if the "stealth camper" thing is a factor to you, as it is for some "van life" enthusiasts.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

Wow, what fantastic responses. Thanks so much! I'll try tor respond quote-for-quote as you have.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> Let's say the roof area is about 2 metres by 4 metres, so that's 8 square metres. Insolation (the amount of solar energy hitting the earth's surface) is very roughly 1 kW/m2 at noon in clear weather, so that's 8 kW. A solar cell is 20% efficient if you're lucky, so that much panel area could ideally produce 1.6 kW. Over a day in clear weather you might get the equivalent of four hours of full sun (actually 12 hours, but mostly not direct as the angle to the sun changes) so at the equator the van might collect 5 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of energy. That's enough to drive perhaps 10 km (6 miles)... and it's a highly optimistic and ideal estimate.
> 
> Also, in an RV situation you will need energy to live (ventilation, lighting, cooking...), and much of what you can get from a rooftop array will go to that. I think rooftop panels are a great idea - I just don't think that it's reasonable to expect to drive anywhere on energy collected that way.


Excellent, thanks. Yeah, there are serious limitations, but if I were to go out and park somewhere for a few days / two weeks or more, it could enable me to just passively charge the battery--or at the very least, be making sure that doing things like using my computer and lights and so on aren't sucking away my ability to get back to town! Meanwhile, it won't hurt range. Thanks for the estimate, though, that's helpful. I think it makes sense to add even if using a gas van, so I'll do it anyways, and we'll just see in the end how it ends up going. Really appreciate those estimates, that's exactly what I was hoping for.

One other question, though I'm 80% sure I can imagine the answer--there's no 'extended' "portable" solar array I could/should bring with me option that I could lay out when parked to improve my rate of recharge substantially, is there? Would we be looking at something like 100-200 lbs of panels, significant space being taken up, and not much extra energy generated? Anyways, I think the generator option in combination with some amount of solar on the roof sounds like the ideal all around from what I'm gathering.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> You can't walk on a battery, or even on a floor panel supported by a battery. This would mean building a complete structural floor above the cargo floor, making a space between them for the battery. That would take a lot of height, so even the tallest of these vans would then be short of headroom.
> 
> I suggest trying to find a way to put the battery under the floor, or at least in the base of cabinets (such as seating).


 Great info, not something I had thought about until I was writing this post out, and I'm glad I did. Makes the build a bit more complex, but glad to know this now at this stage.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> That would work, and if you must carry a generator in an EV under the hood is a good place for it; however, if you drive it as a series hybrid that's likely to be less efficient than just driving with the original engine.


Indeed, driving with it running is a secondary purpose. I would plan to just use it as an electric vehicle, but having a generator there means far more flexibility when driving an EV into remote areas.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> Yes, with a large battery there will be a significant increase in weight. Fortunately, a properly equipped commercial van has a lot more payload than needed for a basic RV interior, so it can also carry substantial battery weight.


Would you happen to be able to give a general ballpark comparison on what I might expect? Removing 800 lbs, adding 1000 lbs, or is that way off?


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> You can't walk on a battery, or even on a floor panel supported by a battery. This would mean building a complete structural floor above the cargo floor, making a space between them for the battery. That would take a lot of height, so even the tallest of these vans would then be short of headroom.
> 
> I suggest trying to find a way to put the battery under the floor, or at least in the base of cabinets (such as seating).


Excellent, thanks. That was going to make the build a lot simpler in my head, but I'm glad I asked. I'll have to just look at the body in question and get some measurements on the batteries I guess, see where/how I can manage this.

Either I find a way to put it all under the cargo area itself, or I put it under cabinets, the bed/storage area in the very back, under the hood, and/or the seats. Sounds like this will be a somewhat involved part of the build, though, sorting this all out. Looking at a model 3 battery, it seems like it can be split into 4 long slices, with some complexity. Any other thoughts or resources or things I should be aware of on this?


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

(will respond to rest in a few hours)


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Either I find a way to put it all under the cargo area itself, or I put it under cabinets, the bed/storage area in the very back, under the hood, and/or the seats. Sounds like this will be a somewhat involved part of the build, though, sorting this all out.


Yes, it's definitely a major challenge.



fintip said:


> Looking at a model 3 battery, it seems like it can be split into 4 long slices, with some complexity. Any other thoughts or resources or things I should be aware of on this?


The Model 3 battery is well known for being difficult to use, because the modules are so long... but I had the same thought, that all four the modules could be stacked and fit under a bed or bed-length seat. tiger82 shows a Model 3 battery repackaged this way in the recent update to his Tesla-motor Cobra race car. In his 1950 Jaguar conversion, SuperfastMatt opens up Model 3 battery case and rearranges the modules to fit in his car.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> I understand the logic, and I agree that having a very small vehicle makes some sense - it's like a yacht with a tender or dinghy. But...
> 
> None of these vehicles are intended to support a load up front. I doubt you'll find a front-mounted hitch receiver for any of them.
> 
> ...


Oh, I'd be adding the front mounted hitch receiver myself. And this isn't an idea that I'm the first to think of, it's been done before. See here and here, here. It partially blocks lights, but not unacceptably, and there are options to help ifthe blocking is significant.

I also have a folding bicycle that will definitely be coming with me! But that's not always the same in this country.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> Yes, it's definitely a major challenge.
> 
> 
> The Model 3 battery is well known for being difficult to use, because the modules are so long... but I had the same thought, that all four the modules could be stacked and fit under a bed or bed-length seat. tiger82 shows a Model 3 battery repackaged this way in the recent update to his Tesla-motor Cobra race car. In his 1950 Jaguar conversion, SuperfastMatt opens up Model 3 battery case and rearranges the modules to fit in his car.


I was thinking of SuperfastMatt in particular, I happened to have watched his video last night. That guy is fucking competent, though. (definitely sent me down a spiral watching his stuff, super talented guy.)


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Oh, I'd be adding the front mounted hitch receiver myself. And this isn't an idea that I'm the first to think of, it's been done before. See here and here, here. It partially blocks lights, but not unacceptably, and there are options to help ifthe blocking is significant.
> 
> I also have a folding bicycle that will definitely be coming with me! But that's not always the same in this country.


Yes, there are lots of commercially available front hitches, but not likely for any of the vans you are considering.

Did either of the videos show the effect on lighting? There's no way to carry a motorcycle without substantially interfering.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> For an idea of how to package components in an EV conversion of a van, this article shows how Ford arranged the E-Transit:
> The New 2022 Ford e-Transit Will Carry the Spare Under the Front, More Details are Revealed
> 
> They chose RWD, despite having a FWD version available and needing a new independent rear suspension to allow RWD with the battery in the middle, probably because with all of that battery weight the vehicle will be rear-heavy in use. The space under the hood is mostly used up with all of the electronics needed, plus the spare tire.


Super interesting, and the video there that discusses other e-vans coming in the future is also really helpful. Interesting that the e-ducatto van is claiming 200+ miles on a 79kwh battery. That makes me optimistic that the early ford numbers are conservative and assume a heavy payload.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> Yes, there are lots of commercially available front hitches, but not likely for any of the vans you are considering.
> 
> Did either of the videos show the effect on lighting? There's no way to carry a motorcycle without substantially interfering.


Yes, one of the videos talks extensively about it. He said that while it does get in the way somewhat, it is perfectly usable and no cop has pulled him over at night despite passing him. He also said that he intended to mount additional auxilary lights to the front of the motorcycle mount itself.

As for how hard getting a front hitch on it will be, I admit I just assumed it wouldn't be that hard, but I'm not the welder myself. I guess I'll have to look more into that.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> A single Tesla Model S or Model X motor might overheat in use. They are capable of putting out lots of power, but not much continuously because the rotor gets too hot. A Model 3 motor - although rated at lower peak power - might be a better choice.
> 
> The motor from any of the heavier production EVs is worth considering, if you have a way to control it.
> 
> Since all production EVs mount the motor at or adjacent to the driven axle, used with an independent suspension, all production EV drive units (motor plus transaxle) can potentially work at the front (if the van's suspension allows for driven axles) or at the rear (if you are willing to convert the van to an independent rear suspension).


Interesting, my friend with the tools who has been considering this for a long time also wondered about the motor being able to deal with the weight. I'm not sure I really understand why; a model S engine might put out 600+ hp, substantially more than would come with the stock e-transit. Shouldn't that mean the motor would be working well below capacity? What am I missing? And what might be better about a model 3 motor? (Also, I read that there is no public controller available out there for the model 3 motors; how would I approach that issue?)

That said, I don't recall if I mentioned it here or not: does a manual transmission not help here?

What heavier/other production EV motors would you recommend I look into? (I'm just not familiar with what all my choices are, I only started putting this all together in this last week and it's a new domain for me.)


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> *Extreme idea: tractor-based RV*
> 
> It is common in Europe to build what we could call a Class C motorhome (using a commercial truck or van cab and chassis with an RV body) by using what Mercedes calls a "tractor head" and Fiat calls a "tractor cab": the front of a front-wheel-drive van, just to the back of the cab, with a rear frame and rear suspension built for this purpose (not using the van's rear structure or chassis at all) and the RV body on that. This allows the motorhome designer maximum flexibility in designing the rear structure to hit the desired floor height and to accommodate RV components such as tanks.
> 
> ...


So, the stealth-camping aspect is quite important to me. I actually plan to live in a parking lot of a particular martial arts gym I plan to train at daily for a couple of years, and also value the idea of being able to just park and sleep wherever at night without worrying about being harrassed. The other factor is that ease of parking is a big deal and would be really great. Finally, the aerodynamics are probably significantly worse on the box-truck design. That said, a box-truck based design built on this kind of platform that's already out there is something that I'll have to consider.

Because of that, I can't really consider any 'real' motorhomes, though they often also have very low build quality as well. I also don't plan on including any tanks, and will be designing my van for boondocking primarily.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> *Energy Consumption*
> 
> 
> I don't know what you really mean by efficiency. If you mean that energy consumption would be 30% higher per distance travelled than a Tesla... well of course it will be much higher, because there is no comparable Tesla. Tesla doesn't make enormous vans. It doesn't matter what battery and what motor you use, this van will take much more energy to drive than a car due mostly to the aerodynamic drag (but also due to the weight).


Unfortunately, I wasn't able to go back and find my source, so I'm not sure if they were somehow referring to efficiency of the motor itself (which is how I remember interpreting what I was reading at the time as the author's point) or if it really was a moot comparison that was just pointing out difference due to drag coefficient (intentionally or inadvertently). It seemed like they were saying somehow that the motor was just not turning battery capacity into power/range as efficiently, but in retrospect I can't imagine how they would even determine that at this stage.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> *Van Comparison*
> 
> 
> I don't think they're bad in general, but as with any vehicle there are weak points. The Transit uses a flex coupling (or "Guibo joint") at the transmission output, and that regularly dies. You can just replace it, and live with the unnecessary maintenance item because someone went cheap and didn't specify a proper CV joint.
> ...


Yup, I accidentally typed the opposite of what I meant to type, doing that post at around 4am. whoops.

Appreciate the comments on the sprinter, further cementing the choice to stay away from that. Seems like the Transit might also suffer some rust issues as well, unfortunately, from what I've seen on youtube, not sure how widespread the problem is though.

I was only aware of the RWD Transit, though I forgot that in 2020 they started releasing an AWD model--that's just not in my budget because it's too new, so for me, it effectively doesn't exist. Didn't know about the Ram actually being a re-badge of a van that has an AWD version abroad, that's interesting/odd. I wonder why they didn't release that here?

Thinking about weight, I definitely feel like removing the driveshaft and just mounting it directly to save the weight and minimize the complexity is the way to go. Seems hard to decide which van to pick without having a bare body to look underneath when it comes to deciding between the Transit and Promaster, though.


----------



## fintip (May 24, 2021)

brian_ said:


> Yes, with a large battery there will be a significant increase in weight. Fortunately, a properly equipped commercial van has a lot more payload than needed for a basic RV interior, so it can also carry substantial battery weight.


I should mention that I am concerned about weight because many camper builds easily push the limits of theird weight capacity without going electric, from what I've read. Before I commit to the build, I'm going to have to do a weight inventory sanity check on everything and make sure it's all feasible and doesn't end up unusable for me. We'll see, I suppose.


----------



## Kato659 (Aug 5, 2019)

fintip said:


> I should mention that I am concerned about weight because many camper builds easily push the limits of theird weight capacity without going electric, from what I've read. Before I commit to the build, I'm going to have to do a weight inventory sanity check on everything and make sure it's all feasible and doesn't end up unusable for me. We'll see, I suppose.


If you're not including water and waste systems (which add a lot to the weight of a camper), and are a bit Spartan on the interior, with an ICE van you would be well under the GVWR. That is a big battery pack you are planning, though.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Yes, one of the videos talks extensively about it. He said that while it does get in the way somewhat, it is perfectly usable and no cop has pulled him over at night despite passing him. He also said that he intended to mount additional auxilary lights to the front of the motorcycle mount itself.


Cops generally write only speeding tickets backed up by radar readings - anything else is too likely to be disputed and they don't bother. Blatantly unsafe garbage rolls around the roads all over the place, every day - that doesn't mean it's a good idea to create more.

Additional - or replacement - lamps are the solution, just as they are with snowplows.



fintip said:


> As for how hard getting a front hitch on it will be, I admit I just assumed it wouldn't be that hard, but I'm not the welder myself. I guess I'll have to look more into that.


It's not about the welding difficulty, it's a question of designing a structure to support load where the vehicle is not designed to support it.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Interesting, my friend with the tools who has been considering this for a long time also wondered about the motor being able to deal with the weight. I'm not sure I really understand why; a model S engine might put out 600+ hp, substantially more than would come with the stock e-transit. Shouldn't that mean the motor would be working well below capacity? What am I missing? And what might be better about a model 3 motor? (Also, I read that there is no public controller available out there for the model 3 motors; how would I approach that issue?)


None of the Tesla Model S/X induction motors can run anywhere near their rated output for very long before overheating. Think about a drag racer: hundreds or thousands of horsepower, but useless for a big truck on the highway because they only have to work for a few seconds at a time. What you're missing is the ability of the motor to remove the heat that is created internally.

The Model S and X have induction motors, and so does the front of a Model 3 or Y; induction motors heat up their rotors due to the induced current flowing through the resistance of the induction windings (cage) in the rotor. The Model 3 and Y have a permanent magnet motor at the rear; permanent magnet rotors don't have any current flowing in the rotor so they create little heat there. The rotor is more difficult to cool than the stator. Almost all current EVs, other than Tesla, have permanent magnet motors. Tesla said when they announced the never-to-be-built Semi that they were using four Model 3 motors in it... not Model S/X motors.

Yes, a usable controller is an issue for a Model 3 motor. The same projects that are using Model 3 batteries (the Cobra race car and 1950 Jaguar) are also using the Model 3 drive unit; I don't have the details, but they have some way to control it (presumably both using an aftermarket controller to command the drive unit over CAN).



fintip said:


> That said, I don't recall if I mentioned it here or not: does a manual transmission not help here?


Not much - the same power is still required, although putting the motor at a speed where it is more efficient helps.



fintip said:


> What heavier/other production EV motors would you recommend I look into? (I'm just not familiar with what all my choices are, I only started putting this all together in this last week and it's a new domain for me.)


Unfortunately there's little choice at this point - just a few very expensive SUVs. In a few years drive units from electric pickup trucks will be available in salvage. But even a Model 3 is heavier than some EVs... I just wouldn't trust the cooling of the motor from something small like a Mitsubishi i-MiEV or Smart ForTwo ED.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Unfortunately, I wasn't able to go back and find my source, so I'm not sure if they were somehow referring to efficiency of the motor itself (which is how I remember interpreting what I was reading at the time as the author's point) or if it really was a moot comparison that was just pointing out difference due to drag coefficient (intentionally or inadvertently). It seemed like they were saying somehow that the motor was just not turning battery capacity into power/range as efficiently, but in retrospect I can't imagine how they would even determine that at this stage.


Many Tesla fanatics assume that everything that Elon touches is magical, so their motors must be incredibly efficient - they then publish statements without a basis in fact. Tesla stuck with induction motors for far too long because that's what was cheap when they started, and their induction motors are undoubtedly less efficient than whatever is in the cheapest EV you can find today. Tesla does use large batteries, which allows the battery to run at a lower power relative to capacity than an EV with a smaller battery, which is more efficient (but requires carrying more weight).

It isn't even really drag coefficient - it's mostly frontal area. Take a Tesla body and build a double-scale version: it will have the same coefficient of drag, but with four times the frontal area it will have four times as much drag. The van will push a lot of air and so will take a lot of energy.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> I was only aware of the RWD Transit, though I forgot that in 2020 they started releasing an AWD model--that's just not in my budget because it's too new, so for me, it effectively doesn't exist.


I wouldn't want to use the AWD system in an EV conversion anyway - the only rational way to do AWD in an EV is to put a motor (or two) at each axle... not run shafts down the length of the vehicle and connect them with mechanical devices.



fintip said:


> Didn't know about the Ram actually being a re-badge of a van that has an AWD version abroad, that's interesting/odd. I wonder why they didn't release that here?


These vans are primarily for commercial use, and AWD isn't important enough for most buyers to pay extra for it - it took a long time for AWD to appear in the Ford and Mercedes lines. Even most RV users don't need or want AWD. The AWD market does exist, such as for "expedition campers", and the Ducato/ProMaster wouldn't be the first choice for most of those buyers even with AWD.



fintip said:


> Thinking about weight, I definitely feel like removing the driveshaft and just mounting it directly to save the weight and minimize the complexity is the way to go.


What do you mean by "mounting it directly"? All of these vans have beam axle rear suspensions, and in the Transit and Sprinter keeping it RWD means connecting a motor to the rear axle. You can mount a motor directly on an axle, this configuration is available from axle suppliers (such as Dana's e-Axles), and it is done on some commercial vehicles, but the extra mass on the axle (called "unsprung mass") hurts ride and handling. In the E-Transit Ford could have done this, but they put in an independent rear suspension instead... even knowing that this vehicle will go almost entirely to commercial cargo carriers. Two decades ago the Ranger EV put the motor at the rear axle, but used a de Dion suspension to avoid putting the motor mass on a moving axle beam.



fintip said:


> Seems hard to decide which van to pick without having a bare body to look underneath when it comes to deciding between the Transit and Promaster, though.


When I'm curious I just go to dealerships and look under the vehicles in the lot - you don't need to see inside to understand the structure and it's easy to see under these vehicles with their high ground clearance.  Keep in mind that the chassis-cab and van versions have substantially different structures in the rear.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Interesting that the e-ducatto van is claiming 200+ miles on a 79kwh battery. That makes me optimistic that the early ford numbers are conservative and assume a heavy payload.


From the eDucato article in TFL Truck:


> FCA’s recent Q2 2020 financial report document shows that the eDucato van will start production in Q4 or this year. The van can be equipped with either a *47 kWh* or a *79 kWh* battery packs. The driving range is quoted at *137 miles* for the smaller battery to *225 miles* with the larger battery pack.


I suggest caution with these values. Since they are about a European product, they will be according to one of the European range testing standards; both of those standards are more optimistic than the North American standards, and one (NEDC) is wildly unrealistic.

Electric Vehicle Range Testing: UNDERSTANDING NEDC VS. WLTP VS. EPA


----------



## Jbear (Apr 14, 2019)

fintip said:


> Short version:
> 
> 
> Standing euro cargo van - I think Dodge Promaster might be the ideal shell.
> ...





fintip said:


> Short version:
> 
> 
> Standing euro cargo van - I think Dodge Promaster might be the ideal shell.
> ...


This is just my experience, take it for what it’s worth. I used to build (convert) ICE to EV for going on 16 years. I am not an electrical engineer and my brain does not operate at the level of electrical knowledge that these other powers do. I am not going to go into my pedigree unless specifically asked to but I spent most of my adult life building race cars from the ground up.
With that said I find that people sometimes abandon tried and true technology for the newest/brightest, and that we cannot step aside or climb out of a box of our own making. The design of most of those vehicles you are discussing are great, but they are an integral package meaning that they need the entire box to remain intact and act as one system for integrity. Whereas an older van with a frame, you can crush any corner or all four and still keep integrity albeit a very ugly integrity. I have over the years performed the exact conversion you are contemplating. One was a 2007 safari, last I heard the owner was in Africa, a 1999 GMC Sierra that we built a custom camper that was just slightly higher than the cab and electric motors raised it for an interior height of 6’ for in place of the bed, and a 2006 Land Rover that towed a custom fold up camper all of them 4wd, running two 360 volt motors, and enough solar (slide out/fold out config) to charge them from 80% DOD in two days with good sunlight and they had two micro generators for back up/emergency. Doing this themselves if they had bothered to learn what they needed would have been approx. $50k each give or take. So you can have a more robust platform that will take more abuse and will be much more adaptable to modifications if you step back and actually question why you need what you think you need.


----------



## Electric Land Cruiser (Dec 30, 2020)

@fintip this is a really cool project. Have you thought about a Nissan NV200? They are already an electric van. They don't have room to stand but I imagine you could add a high-top roof and increase battery capacity for cheaper than converting another van. Also a Smith electric box truck would make an awesome camper conversion. Lastly, mounting a motorcycle on the front is the least challenging aspect of this build. That's super popular for campervans out in my area, I see it all the time.

@Jbear that's my dream! Solar powered overland exploration! Do you have a website where you document the builds?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

Electric Land Cruiser said:


> Have you thought about a Nissan NV200? They are already an electric van


An e-NV200 is an electric van, and it must have a different floor from a regular NV200 to accommodate the battery (which is shared with the Leaf), just as a Leaf has a different floor from other vehicles based on the Renault/Dacia B0 platform. But an actual e-NV200 could be used (if you can find one), and not need conversion at all (but perhaps a battery upgrade to 40 kWh if you get one of the early 24 kWh examples). It's also way too small to live in, although some people make them into minimal campers; without a pop top it doesn't have standing room and a pop top wouldn't work as a "stealth" van.


----------



## Electric Land Cruiser (Dec 30, 2020)

Yep the e-NV200 is what I meant. I also was talking about a permanent fiberglass or plastic "hi-top" which lots of van customization businesses can install and paint to match like factory. The e-NV200 is definitely smaller than the other vans listed.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

Electric Land Cruiser said:


> Yep the e-NV200 is what I meant.


Unfortunately, it's hard to find one of those; I don't know if they were ever widely available for purchase in North America.



Electric Land Cruiser said:


> I also was talking about a permanent fiberglass or plastic "hi-top" which lots of van customization businesses can install and paint to match like factory.


Yes, you can put an ugly thing like this on top...








and still not be able to stand up inside. These little vans are just not tall enough to start with.



Electric Land Cruiser said:


> I also was talking about a permanent fiberglass or plastic "hi-top" which lots of van customization businesses can install and paint to match like factory. The e-NV200 is definitely smaller than the other vans listed.


Yes, the NV200 is too small, unlike the other Nissan "NV" commercial vans. The Ram ProMaster City is too small, unlike the Ram ProMaster. The Ford Transit Connect is too small, unlike a Ford Transit. The shared names for commercial van lines can be misleading, suggesting that the little vans are somehow related to the larger vans, but the only connection is the target commercial-use market.


----------



## daklein (May 4, 2012)

This is a great thread, and I'm thinking of making an EV ram promaster. I haven't done a DIY EV yet, besides a lithium ElecTrak lawn tractor, and putting a 62kwhr pack into our older leaf. I'm in the US.

I'm leaning toward the promaster: it's a van, tall & wide (for camper conversion), front wheel drive so flat open underfloor, and should have good GVW capacity up to 9500#. The van floor is higher under the cab seats, (ICE fuel tank space) which could allow for the taller part of a 62kwhr Leaf pack (riding backwards with longer HV cables), or a M3 penthouse (again riding backward, but the HV cables to the rear motor already are at that end.)

Of special interest are the 2014-2016 promaster diesels, which have an AMT automated manual trans with single (automated) clutch. It's a robotized manual, with actuators for clutch & shifting, it could be just left in the usual desired gear. So for only an adapter plate and motor mounts and a Leaf motor maybe, it could be mechanically an EV, with the huge wide available gear range to get up any steep hill regardless of larger diameter tires. Stock trans, diff, CV drive shafts. 

Another option is a complete Leaf drive unit. Or a Tesla M3 drive unit, maybe more powerful, but controls could be more trouble or expensive. Maxwell does a professional promaster EV conversion. It looks like they use the M3 drive unit and battery complete. Mechanically need motor mounts and custom drive shafts.

I was looking for a cheap Rialta (they sell for too much, even for 25 years old), or a LeSharo (so old and nasty inside), with a blown powertrain. But they look like a camper and I'd want to mostly rebuild inside. They also seem to be GVW limited, folks have rear wheel bearings that fall off, larger tires don't fit as is. The Rialtas are cool, but I think we just want a newer van.

So my current debate is whether a Leaf or Tesla set of components would be the best to use: 

Cost: Leaf probably less expensive, but M3 are so many out there now that maybe auction prices will come down. The older 80kw Leaf crashes can be very low cost, but I think I'd want the 160kw plus traction inverter and certainly the 62kw battery. The 62kwhr plus cars are not nearly as common as M3, and Leafers want the packs for their old Leafs (I'm the proof...), so I guess I'll keep watching the auctions. 

Controls: The Leaf can bus controls seem to be well figured out thanks to many DIYers, a battery can bridge solves various issues. Using the whole Tesla pack might be challenging for DIY controls, but maybe someone sells a solution.

A Leaf drive unit stack could be kept all together, minus the gearbox, and mated to a manual trans. Leaf would have Chademo & 6.6kw OBC, Tesla would have supercharger DCFC that will never work for me and a bit faster (10? kw OBC). 

Miscellanous necessities: There will be a lot more thinking and figuring out here. The van safety systems will need some CAN signals provided to stay happy. Van brakes would need a vacuum pump, or the diesel van may already have some other brake boost solution (no engine vacuum on diesels generally). The steering would need some assist; easiest might be an electro hydraulic pump screaming away all the time, but more elegant would be a column or rack EPS if a Leaf / Tesla set of parts would work. Cluster and dash and HVAC integration; I would want the HV a/c compressor from donor vehicle.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

daklein said:


> The steering would need some assist; easiest might be an electro hydraulic pump screaming away all the time, but more elegant would be a column or rack EPS if a Leaf / Tesla set of parts would work.


Electro-hydraulic steering pumps never scream, and barely do anything most of the time. Their controllers regulate their speed to as low as possible while still meeting hydraulic demand, so they are quieter than engine-driven power steering pumps.

In a quick search, it appears that the ProMaster uses a traditional engine-driven hydraulic pump, so a electric pump would be the most straightforward conversion.

Yes, fully electric assist would be a more elegant solution, but if the van doesn't come with it then a rack or column replacement would be required. There is no need to limit sources to EVs such as the Leaf or Tesla (although if getting everything else from one EV, using the steering assist as well makes sense); as long as you can sort out the control communications, most vehicles use electric-assist steering now (electric assist didn't even start with EVs). These vans are heavy - a Leaf rack or column seems unlikely to be suitable.



daklein said:


> Van brakes would need a vacuum pump, or the diesel van may already have some other brake boost solution (no engine vacuum on diesels generally).


Similarly, electric assist is now common for the brakes, with many possible donor vehicles, largely using the Bosch iBooster. So if the van doesn't already have electric boost, and you're willing to change the master cylinder, there's no need to deal with a vacuum pump or high-pressure hydraulic pump (the usual solution for diesels).

It appears from a quick search that the ProMaster uses a vacuum booster and electric vacuum pump (for both diesel and gasoline variants).


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

brian_ said:


> For an idea of how to package components in an EV conversion of a van, this article shows how Ford arranged the E-Transit:
> The New 2022 Ford e-Transit Will Carry the Spare Under the Front, More Details are Revealed


A more clear and detailed version of this information has now been published by Ford, as I just posted in the News section (_Ford releases e-Transit details_), in the form of a presentation from the Ford Body Builder Advisory Service.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

fintip said:


> Would you happen to be able to give a general ballpark comparison on what I might expect? Removing 800 lbs, adding 1000 lbs, or is that way off?


The Ford E-Transit is - according to the Ford Body Builder Advisory Service - 600 pounds heavier than the same Transit configuration but with the base 3.5 L V6 engine. That's with the 67 kWh battery and rear drive unit from the Mach-E.


----------



## craigdaneroberts (9 mo ago)

brian_ said:


> I understand the logic, and I agree that having a very small vehicle makes some sense - it's like a yacht with a tender or dinghy. But...
> 
> None of these vehicles are intended to support a load up front. I doubt you'll find a front-mounted hitch receiver for any of them.
> 
> ...


Get one of these instead of a motorcycle: Sur Ron X Bike (Black Edition)


----------

