# Kostov 9" 220 with Solion Jr Controller



## bonewibb (Aug 30, 2009)

Has anyone used the Kostov 9" 220 volt motor with the Evnetics Solition Jr Controller? Looking at that setup for my 1969 VW Bug Convertible Conversion using a Rebirth Auto Transmission adapter. I think it would be a better fit that the Warp 9.


----------



## mora (Nov 11, 2009)

I have no experience of higher voltages or Soliton Jr, but I suppose you could take a look at this post: http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showpost.php?p=260673&postcount=12 if you want to compare warp9 and K9 220V. Kostov also has interpoles which Warp9 doesn't have.

I have 9" 220V Kostov and currently run it at 96V. Torque falls off early with that voltage but it does fine in town and pushes my conversion to 60mph. There is enough torque available to make stock VW Golf (rabbit) clutch slip at about 400 motor amps. I believe it will be plenty of motor for a bug too. Be sure to feed it with lots of voltage if you want it to keep pulling at higher speeds.


----------



## bonewibb (Aug 30, 2009)

I'm looking at using a Kennedy Stage 1 clutch with HI-PERFORMANCE CUSHION LOCK CLUTCH DISC. I'm thinking that should eliminate most slippage.


----------



## Yabert (Feb 7, 2010)

Hi Bone

I don't currently use a kostov motor, but I think you are right when you said than those K9 motor can advantageously replace a Warp 9 in some situation. Especially because they are smaller and lighter, but keeping good power capability by trading some torque by higher rpm.


From the Kostov spec sheet K9 220v : Power 1h = 43hp and peak (@500A) = 102 hp...

I think your controller choose is good.
If the high voltage fear you and if you don't need that much power, the K9 144v can be a good choose too: Power 1h = 32 hp and 69 hp peak.... so plenty if you don't need a race car.

But keep in mind, power come from battery.....


----------



## corbin (Apr 6, 2010)

bonewibb said:


> I'm looking at using a Kennedy Stage 1 clutch with HI-PERFORMANCE CUSHION LOCK CLUTCH DISC. I'm thinking that should eliminate most slippage.


I have a stage 1 disc and it slips. At least, I'm pretty sure that is what the noise is when I hit the throttle really hard.

corbin


----------



## DavidDymaxion (Dec 1, 2008)

I have a Kennedy pressure plate, not sure which stage but it's rated for 450 ft*lbs of torque. No slips yet with 1000 A and an 11 inch Kostov. The pedal pressure is not bad but definitely higher, and I lost the original clutch cable, on cable #2 now. If it turns out to be a clutch cable destroyer I'll switch to a hydraulic.


corbin said:


> I have a stage 1 disc and it slips. At least, I'm pretty sure that is what the noise is when I hit the throttle really hard.
> 
> corbin


----------



## corbin (Apr 6, 2010)

DavidDymaxion said:


> I have a Kennedy pressure plate, not sure which stage but it's rated for 450 ft*lbs of torque. No slips yet with 1000 A and an 11 inch Kostov. The pedal pressure is not bad but definitely higher, and I lost the original clutch cable, on cable #2 now. If it turns out to be a clutch cable destroyer I'll switch to a hydraulic.


http://www2.cip1.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=ACC-C10-5143

Stage 1 is 180ft-lbs of torque. Stage 4 is 300. So, what you have is definitely stronger than both.

I'd recommend a stage 2. Bill Dube told me this too...but I picked the stage 1 to make it easier to shift. But...I barely shift, and frequently shift without the clutch, so a stage 2 or 3 would have been better to get.

corbin


----------



## DavidDymaxion (Dec 1, 2008)

Apparently different stages for different cars. I was wrong, stage 1 for my car is 550 ft*lbs.

http://kennedyenginc.com/PorscheClutches.aspx

I don't know if you could adapt a Porsche clutch to a VW, but Kennedy does offer a dual disk kit that doubles the allowed torque (this is how I'd do my next conversion):

http://kennedyenginc.com/DoubleDisc.aspx



corbin said:


> http://www2.cip1.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=ACC-C10-5143
> 
> Stage 1 is 180ft-lbs of torque. Stage 4 is 300. So, what you have is definitely stronger than both.
> 
> ...


----------

