# Fiat 600 electric conversion



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

Hello,

I am working on a Fiat 600 from 1969, and i am thinking of converting it to eletric. I already choose all the components of the eletric system but i am not sure that it will run without problems so i am here to see if any of you notice something missing. 

The eletric system consists on:

HPEVS motor AC35 96V 650A
Curtis controller 1238E-7621 (72/96V 650A) with cooling plate
Curtis Foot Pedal
CALB CA180FI or CA100FI batteries (still figuring out the battery boxes)
Cooling liquid pump (and a radiator?) for the controller and batteries
Elcon PFC2500 battery charger
Mennekes plug and connector
Orion BMS 2
Gigavac GV240 contactor for starting the car
Gigavac HBD41 manual switch for maintenance
TBS battery monitor expert modular 12V (with shunt)
Curtis DC/DC converter 1400 72/96V

What do you think? Should i change something or this system would work fine? I will take any help i can get!

Cheers!


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

Hi Alexandre,
with 63hp you will need a new set of tyres every 4 weeks, besides of having a lot of fun. (My personal opinion: for a daily driver, half the power is sufficient.) It seems that You want to keep the transmission, which I consider wasting weight and space - both is rare and precious in a 600 FIAT. You may consider a (second-hand?) motor/diff-unit, might be unbeatably compact.
I cannot see what range You are planning, or if it is going to remain a 4-seater, but keep an eye on the car's total weight and its front/rear-distribution. Otherwise the beast will be hard to drive.
I wish You good success, and keep us informed about the progress, with many pictures!
Markus


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> Hi Alexandre,
> with 63hp you will need a new set of tyres every 4 weeks, besides of having a lot of fun. (My personal opinion: for a daily driver, half the power is sufficient.) It seems that You want to keep the transmission, which I consider wasting weight and space - both is rare and precious in a 600 FIAT. You may consider a (second-hand?) motor/diff-unit, might be unbeatably compact.
> I cannot see what range You are planning, or if it is going to remain a 4-seater, but keep an eye on the car's total weight and its front/rear-distribution. Otherwise the beast will be hard to drive.
> I wish You good success, and keep us informed about the progress, with many pictures!
> Markus


Maybe reducing the system to 48V would work. According to the manufacturer of the motor, it would get a maximum of 27 HP that way, which is closer to the original. I would need to select a different controller but everything else could stay the same.
About the transmission, in my country is really dificult to legalize these kinds of projects so i am trying to not mess with anything that isnt really necessary and it would make the project a bit more expensive...
Its suppose to be a city car so maybe a 75-100km range would be good. A bunch of CALB batteries in the engine bay and some in the frunk and i think it would be good, at least i hope! 
Thank you for your reply!


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

I just found this:








Seems to be a school project.
Where do you come from? It might be an advantage (legally) to use certified parts from an OEM, such as a complete drive unit.
If reduced power does not come with a weight benefit, you should stay with the 63hp. Make the voltage as high as you can, this keeps current (Amperes) low and you save cable diameter (= weight)
100km appears reasonable, my Mini (660kg) does this with a 90kg battery pack made of 18650-cells.

Markus


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

I wouldn't get excited about 63 HP being too much, since that's only a peak value (can't be sustained without overheating) at the ideal speed (2900 RPM). To get anything close to that a multi-speed transmission would be needed; if you take the usual production EV approach of a single reduction ratio, at anything other than the ideal road speed it would have less power available - and that's probably okay. I assume that in picking this specific motor you have looked at the performance charts from HPEVS.

For the battery 96 volts (nominal) at 3.2 V/cell implies 30 cells in series, so 
CA100FI pack would total 99 kg and 62 litres for 10 kWh, and
CA180FI pack would total 168 kg and 101 litres for 18 kWh,
... plus interconnections, structure, and housing in each case. If the volume is hard to visualize, that's a row
216 mm x 142 mm x 2 m long (CA100 cells), or
279 mm x 180 mm x 2 m long (CA180 cells).

Those are actually relatively small packs, but this is a very small car... it will be interesting to see where they go. The stock fuel tank is in front, so a small pack could go there. With a stock transmission and AC-35 there would be little room left in the rear - perhaps a row of cells to each side of the motor or one across above the motor - so the rear seat becomes the next target.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> I just found this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah those videos are nice, i already had seen them.
I'm from Portugal. I understand what you are saying but i feel like the less i change in the car the easier it will be to legalize, at least that is what i got from the research i did on this subject here in my country. If i change other things it needs to go to safety tests and it becomes very expensive and time consuming.
So is it okay to only have batteries in series? I saw some EV conversions and they use blocks of 4 paralel and 3 series and then they have a bunch of those blocks in series...
Can you send me the list of components you got to convert your mini? Its a similar car to mine, it would help i guess.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> I wouldn't get excited about 63 HP being too much, since that's only a peak value (can't be sustained without overheating) at the ideal speed (2900 RPM). To get anything close to that a multi-speed transmission would be needed; if you take the usual production EV approach of a single reduction ratio, at anything other than the ideal road speed it would have less power available - and that's probably okay. I assume that in picking this specific motor you have looked at the performance charts from HPEVS.
> 
> For the battery 96 volts (nominal) at 3.2 V/cell implies 30 cells in series, so
> CA100FI pack would total 99 kg and 62 litres for 10 kWh, and
> ...


Hey,

Yes, i saw the performance charts from hpevs and that was why i choose the AC-35 with a 96V system, but come to think of it and maybe its a bit overkill, maybe a 72V system would be better just to have a bit more power than the original. With that it gives 48HP peak, what do you think?
Thank you for your help. I was aiming for a 15kWh but maybe just 10kWh would be sufficient. I was thinking of putting a box over the motor and a box in the frunk. If that isnt sufficient then maybe putting some in the back seats but i am trying to maintain those seats...
Here is the video that i am basing my project on:




If i get anything close to that i would be happy!

Im also making the project in CAD to see if the components fit before i buy them (and also because its part of my thesis), here is a pic of the back:









When i add the motor and the battery packs i will update you!

Cheers


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> Here is the video that i am basing my project on:
> ...


This isn't a bad walkaround - certainly much better than some I've seen - but it's annoying to see only the outsides of the battery boxes. I assume that their target is just potential customers for their kit, rather than anyone really doing it themselves. For those not using Tesla battery modules, this doesn't matter.

Comparing the weight and power of an engine to an electric motor is nonsense, because the motor can't do anything without a huge battery - only complete system weights (engine plus fuel, cooling, etc. versus motor plus battery, controller, charger, cooling, etc) can be reasonably compared.

They are not getting much advantage out of the transmission, only using two gear ratios. It's mostly a conversion convenience, allowing them to use an off-the-shelf adapter for the motor to the transmission and single motor mount, without worrying about anything else mechanically or structurally.

The rear pack is across the car above the motor. This is a really high location for a substantial mass, but is a viable possibility for some of the battery modules, for most module types (including a row of CALB prismatic cells). Some conversions of rear-engine cars have placed modules along each side of the motor, but in this case either there is not enough space, or vehicle structure is in the way, or they need the room for the electronic components (although those seem to be entirely above the motor in this case), or they just wanted to use Tesla modules which are too long and wide to fit there; a row of CALB cells or a small rectangular module (one of the LG Chem or CALB units) might fit.

And of course this is a Fiat 500 but the current project is a 600, which is a bit bigger.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> I was thinking of putting a box over the motor and a box in the frunk. If that isnt sufficient then maybe putting some in the back seats but i am trying to maintain those seats...
> 
> Im also making the project in CAD to see if the components fit before i buy them (and also because its part of my thesis), here is a pic of the back:
> View attachment 120273
> ...


The planning is looking good, and I'm looking forward to those updates.

It does look like a module or some cells on each side of the motor (assuming the motor mounted to the original transaxle) might be possible. That would be lower (better for stability and handling) than over the motor, but it would also be slightly further rearward (which isn't desirable).

I had not noticed that this project is also an academic exercise. It would be good to work out the centre of mass location, both front to back (determining axle load distribution) and vertically (affecting stability, responsiveness, and load transfer on acceleration and braking) either in the CAD tool or separately, for the alternative configurations.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> So is it okay to only have batteries in series? I saw some EV conversions and they use blocks of 4 paralel and 3 series and then they have a bunch of those blocks in series...


Cells in parallel at anything other than the lowest level of the configuration are a problem for balancing and management.

What every production EV battery configuration does is connect enough cells in parallel groups to get the desired capacity (anything from only one 43 Ah cell in the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid, to 2 to 4 cells at 40 Ah to 60 Ah in most EVs, to dozens of little cylindrical cells in Teslas), then connect enough of those groups in series to get to the desired operating voltage (most commonly 96 groups for 360 volts nominal). The series is broken up into modules of a manageable size, which doesn't matter electrically. In this system, the battery management system needs only one tap into the battery per group to monitor voltage at the cell level and to balance the charge level of all groups; there is only one set (on positive and negative) of disconnect relays needed and only one charging current to manage.

Because modules don't come in the sizes and configurations specifically suited to all conversions, many builders assemble other configurations. The most common is to build a typical (parallel at lowest level, then series those groups) pack of the desired voltage from available modules, then build two or more of those packs or "strings" and connect the strings in parallel to get enough power and energy capacity. This requires a complete set of battery management hardware for each string including possibly shutting off charging separately. Examples include the people who have used two complete sets of Chevrolet Volt modules, as two parallel strings.

With individual cells such as the CALB prismatics, the only sensible thing to do is the same as production EVs - parallel first. With the cell capacities, total capacity, and target voltage originally proposed for this project, the only reasonable configuration would be all 30 cells in series. Connecting the 100 Ah cells in parallel pairs and 22 of those pairs in series would result in a 200 Ah 70 V (14 kWh) pack.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> This isn't a bad walkaround - certainly much better than some I've seen - but it's annoying to see only the outsides of the battery boxes. I assume that their target is just potential customers for their kit, rather than anyone really doing it themselves. For those not using Tesla battery modules, this doesn't matter.
> 
> Comparing the weight and power of an engine to an electric motor is nonsense, because the motor can't do anything without a huge battery - only complete system weights (engine plus fuel, cooling, etc. versus motor plus battery, controller, charger, cooling, etc) can be reasonably compared.
> 
> ...


Yeah, they are just trying to sell the conversion kit without explaining every detail... But its a good layout for the components in the conversion i think.

Yes and in my project, i already removed all the engine components and i am going to wheigh in all of it so that when i choose the eletric system and the batteries and all that, the wheight difference wont be a lot (at leats in the back, if it gets a lot heavier in the back i will put some batteries in the front).

The biggest advantage is that i dont have to buy a automatic transmission, making the conversion a bit cheaper.

I am still considering the Tesla Model S batteries, i think in this layout they are probably the best fit. I only have to put 2 tesla batteries in the back above the motor and 1 in the front, giving it a 72V system and about 15kWh. When i design the batteries boxes and have all the important electric components in the CAD desing i will update you to see what you think of it and the components i choose.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> Cells in parallel at anything other than the lowest level of the configuration are a problem for balancing and management.
> 
> What every production EV battery configuration does is connect enough cells in parallel groups to get the desired capacity (anything from only one 43 Ah cell in the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid, to 2 to 4 cells at 40 Ah to 60 Ah in most EVs, to dozens of little cylindrical cells in Teslas), then connect enough of those groups in series to get to the desired operating voltage (most commonly 96 groups for 360 volts nominal). The series is broken up into modules of a manageable size, which doesn't matter electrically. In this system, the battery management system needs only one tap into the battery per group to monitor voltage at the cell level and to balance the charge level of all groups; there is only one set (on positive and negative) of disconnect relays needed and only one charging current to manage.
> 
> ...


And what about with 3 tesla model s batteries in series? i would only need a orion 2 BMS to manage the batteries and it would work fine right? Do i still need the disconnect relays?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> The biggest advantage is that i dont have to buy a automatic transmission, making the conversion a bit cheaper.


I've apparently missed something here... why would any conversion require you to buy an automatic transmission? Automatic transmissions are a terrible combination with electric motors.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> I am still considering the Tesla Model S batteries...


While some retailers refer to these as "batteries", and in a sense they are (because they are sets of cells), normal practice in the EV world is to call them "modules". "Battery" is reserved for the complete system of cells (usually arranged in modules) and their housing.



alexandrept21 said:


> And what about with 3 tesla model s batteries in series? i would only need a orion 2 BMS to manage the batteries and it would work fine right? Do i still need the disconnect relays?


Each Tesla Model S (or X) module is 6 groups of cells, with the groups in series. Three modules would be 18 cell groups in series, so the BMS needs 18 input points for cell group positive taps (plus the pack negative). It doesn't matter whether they are all in one module or are 18 separate modules or anything in-between, as long as the inputs of the BMS can be wired to the cell groups (Orion calls these input connections "cell taps"). Some modules have a BMS slave unit built into them, so only one communications connector is exposed; the Tesla Model S/X modules have slaves like this, but when using the Orion BMS you remove and discard those slaves and use the wiring that the slave was using with the Orion instead.
Using the Orion BMS with Tesla Battery Modules
Orion BMS 2 Wiring & Installation Manual

The Tesla modules do not include disconnect relays, so you need those, but just one set regardless of the number of modules in series.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> I've apparently missed something here... why would any conversion require you to buy an automatic transmission? Automatic transmissions are a terrible combination with electric motors.


You said this "They are not getting much advantage out of the transmission, only using two gear ratios. It's mostly a conversion convenience, allowing them to use an off-the-shelf adapter for the motor to the transmission and single motor mount, without worrying about anything else mechanically or structurally. ", so what would be the other option?


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> While some retailers refer to these as "batteries", and in a sense they are (because they are sets of cells), normal practice in the EV world is to call them "modules". "Battery" is reserved for the complete system of cells (usually arranged in modules) and their housing.
> 
> 
> Each Tesla Model S (or X) module is 6 groups of cells, with the groups in series. Three modules would be 18 cell groups in series, so the BMS needs 18 input points for cell group positive taps (plus the pack negative). It doesn't matter whether they are all in one module or are 18 separate modules or anything in-between, as long as the inputs of the BMS can be wired to the cell groups (Orion calls these input connections "cell taps"). Some modules have a BMS slave unit built into them, so only one communications connector is exposed; the Tesla Model S/X modules have slaves like this, but when using the Orion BMS you remove and discard those slaves and use the wiring that the slave was using with the Orion instead.
> ...


I found a company that already sells the module with a cell tap that works with the Orion BMS. its Stealth ev, i think i will use some components from there. and they have the 3D designs of a lot of tings which is great!


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> You said this "They are not getting much advantage out of the transmission, only using two gear ratios. It's mostly a conversion convenience, allowing them to use an off-the-shelf adapter for the motor to the transmission and single motor mount, without worrying about anything else mechanically or structurally. ", so what would be the other option?


A single-ratio gearbox, like almost every production EV uses. Not manually shifted, and not automatically shifted... not shifted at all.

The usual way to do this in a conversion is to use a complete drive unit (motor and transaxle) from a production EV. None are arranged the same way as the Fiat (motor in the rear with the shaft longitudinal) so the fit isn't obvious, but a Porsche 911 has the same engine and transaxle layout and people have swapped Tesla Model S drive units into them (replacing both the engine and the original transaxle); of course the Fiat would need a much smaller drive unit. Yabert put a Chevrolet Bolt drive unit in a VW van (again, the same original engine and transaxle layout), but that's still three times the power that the Fiat 600 needs. Yabert provided an image of the Bolt drive unit in the space originally occupied by the VW transaxle, leaving the entire engine bay available (which is needed for the inverter, charger, etc).

There are other mechanical solutions which eliminate carrying the whole original transaxle around in a car which uses only one or two gears of it, but it's more design and fabrication effort (and of course more cost, since the existing transaxle is free) and the existing transaxle is light and small enough that most conversions would just keep it.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> I found a company that already sells the module with a cell tap that works with the Orion BMS. its Stealth ev, i think i will use some components from there. and they have the 3D designs of a lot of tings which is great!


Stealth EV is listed by Orion (in the first document that I linked) as a supplier of wiring adapters to connect the Orion BMS to the Tesla modules.


----------



## alanfuertes (Sep 4, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> I just found this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey! Im the driver of the first video and thats my channel!!!

haha


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> Stealth EV is listed by Orion (in the first document that I linked) as a supplier of wiring adapters to connect the Orion BMS to the Tesla modules.


Do you know if the Stealth EV 3,3kw charger + 1kw DC/DC converter would work on my 72V battery system?


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

alanfuertes said:


> Hey! Im the driver of the first video and thats my channel!!!
> 
> haha


Is the car still running okay? Great project to see!


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> Do you know if the Stealth EV 3,3kw charger + 1kw DC/DC converter would work on my 72V battery system?


No idea... I just noticed Stealth in the Orion document.


----------



## alanfuertes (Sep 4, 2020)

alexandrept21 said:


> Is the car still running okay? Great project to see!


Of course. It’s a school project.
It inspired me to create th SUPERBUG


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

alexandrept21 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am working on a Fiat 600 from 1969, and i am thinking of converting it to eletric. I already choose all the components of the eletric system but i am not sure that it will run without problems so i am here to see if any of you notice something missing.
> 
> ...


You can use any used electronic accelerator pedal, from an auto recycler. There are lots of lightweight 12v cooling pumps, available.


----------



## sunworksco (Sep 8, 2008)

alexandrept21 said:


> Maybe reducing the system to 48V would work. According to the manufacturer of the motor, it would get a maximum of 27 HP that way, which is closer to the original. I would need to select a different controller but everything else could stay the same.
> About the transmission, in my country is really dificult to legalize these kinds of projects so i am trying to not mess with anything that isnt really necessary and it would make the project a bit more expensive...
> Its suppose to be a city car so maybe a 75-100km range would be good. A bunch of CALB batteries in the engine bay and some in the frunk and i think it would be good, at least i hope!
> Thank you for your reply!


Transmissions are a big boat anchor weight and waste of time. The most efficient design is to use a Honda LSD, with a belt drive. This will give you modern drive system and less maintenance.









Quaife QDF7ZR Chain-Drive Sealed ATB Helical LSD Differential for sale online | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Quaife QDF7ZR Chain-Drive Sealed ATB Helical LSD Differential at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!



www.ebay.com


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

youngestEVer said:


> Hello,
> 
> Sounds like a sweet project. Here is my opinion about how you should go about it, just my personal preference.
> 
> ...


Hello Adam,

So i have changed the system a little bit. It will be a 96V system with 4 tesla model S batteries in series (from stealthev, already as one cell tap board). The controller will be a Curtis 1239E-76XX (72-108V 650A) and i replaced the charger and the DC/DC converter with the StealthEV 3,3kW charger + DC/DC 1kW combined (will help saving space if the 2 components are in 1). Also added the ED252B-1 emergency button, a pre scaler for the TBS Expert Pro display and a pre charge resistor to make sure the controller is safe.

I would like to know more about your SCM system. Does it work with the system i am planning? How much does it cost? 

If you could help me with the parts list i would appreciate it a lot!

Answer this to my e-mail:
[email protected]

Cheers!


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> So i have changed the system a little bit. It will be a 96V system with 4 tesla model S batteries in series (from stealthev, already as one cell tap board). The controller will be a Curtis 1239E-76XX (72-108V 650A)...


Using Stealth's numbers for the Model S/X modules, that's a nominal system battery voltage of 92 V, not 96 V. Again with Stealth's values, battery voltage will range from 72 V to 101 V, depending on state of charge. That's okay, and within the controller's range... just keep in mind for performance what your actual available voltage will be.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> Using Stealth's numbers for the Model S/X modules, that's a nominal system battery voltage of 92 V, not 96 V. Again with Stealth's values, battery voltage will range from 72 V to 101 V, depending on state of charge. That's okay, and within the controller's range... just keep in mind for performance what your actual available voltage will be.


The charger 3,3kw + 1kw dc/dc converter only works with 90V+ systems. Should i be worried about that then?


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

alexandrept21 said:


> The charger 3,3kw + 1kw dc/dc converter only works with 90V+ systems. Should i be worried about that then?


The _Charger Output_ spec includes "Nominal Voltage Range: 90-130Vdc" - that should be okay because that's the nominal battery voltage, so it should be able to handle going lower when the battery is discharged.
The _DC/DC Input_ spec includes "Input Voltage: 90-130Vdc" - if they really mean that, it's a problem because DC-DC conversion would stop working properly when the battery charge is low, but they may mean that this is the nominal voltage range again.
It could be that both are supposed to be actual, or both are supposed to be nominal, or that they are idiots and integrated an AC-to-DC charger and DC-to-DC converter with mismatched operating ranges.

Unfortunately, the spec sheet linked to that product web page doesn't help: it doesn't mention "nominal" at all, suggesting that those are actual voltages, and so neither the charger functionality nor the DC-DC functionality would be compatible with the 92 Volt (nominal) system.

Four Tesla S/X modules would run close to the bottom of the battery voltage range for this equipment, even if the specs are nominal voltages. Their examples show a 5-module Tesla pack, which would run at 114 V (nominal) or 90 to 122 V (actual)... suspiciously close to the published specs; it really looks like this unit was designed specifically for 30S (5 Tesla module) configuration of the Panasonic NCR cells used by Tesla. I would contact Stealth EV and ask for clarification of those specs - are they nominal or actual voltages? They obviously are focused on the use of Tesla modules - you could just ask them if this works with four modules.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

brian_ said:


> The _Charger Output_ spec includes "Nominal Voltage Range: 90-130Vdc" - that should be okay because that's the nominal battery voltage, so it should be able to handle going lower when the battery is discharged.
> The _DC/DC Input_ spec includes "Input Voltage: 90-130Vdc" - if they really mean that, it's a problem because DC-DC conversion would stop working properly when the battery charge is low, but they may mean that this is the nominal voltage range again.
> It could be that both are supposed to be actual, or both are supposed to be nominal, or that they are idiots and integrated an AC-to-DC charger and DC-to-DC converter with mismatched operating ranges.
> 
> ...


 Thank you for the help, i will try to figure it out with them. If it doesn't work what do you remcomend? An Elcon 3,3kw charger and an elcon 1kw dc/dc converter?


----------



## djbills (Apr 7, 2010)

There's a great little Fiat 600 here in Oregon that I've ridden in. It's a '59 and was done long ago, and upgraded a lot along the way.


Marko Mongillo's 1959 Fiat 600 "Fiamp"


The guy who did it is a huge Fiat fan, and I believe he has an AC drive old 500 convertible in the works or might have finished it by now. And he has a fun Datsun mini truck.
This 600 is offline now I believe, because of a fender bender, but will be back out there soon I'm sure. Was a lot of fun when it was last on the road, and nice enough for the car shows (the lithium looks just as good as the AGM install and you can tell the care that was taken even in the old photos).

The EV album is out of date - I think it's maybe 120v or 144v of lithium now? I do think he still has the Raptor, not sure what else was upgraded while it was last being rebooted. I think he has plans to take it AC down the road. Would be interesting to hear his thoughts, since he's got so much time in with a few iterations over the years.

In any event - from where I sat, that little Prestolite 7" is a perfect match for it. Despite age. Really moves it well and paired with the stock transmission, it's geared for max fun! Does well with the hills in his area. I'd be curious how his wife's 500 drives, with the AC drive, compared to this.

I'd just say make sure you consider the fun factor in your plans, unless having a similar feel as stock isn't all that important and you want to modernize. A larger motor can seem ok on paper, (and that hyper 9 does have great efficiency) but there does reach a certain point where a 9 can create quite a different feel and unnecessarily add weight vs a 7 or even a smaller 8, both of which will weigh about 1/3 less. Makes the drive a bit more nimble and higher revving, putting the sweet spot where it counts. Might be worth finding someone who's used the same motor in a similar sized car, see what they think after the fact.

I used to have a 9" on my little Electravan and we swapped to a 7" Prestolite like this 600 has (dc system), and it's a huge difference in feel. Much more zip! Feels like a completely different ride. 

Edit - i'll add that I'm completely talking DC and don't know the AC motors at all, so take that into consideration. I get that they're different and I don't even know if there is an equivalent to the old 7" Prestolite on the AC side. Just tossing this out as food for thought.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

djbills said:


> There's a great little Fiat 600 here in Oregon that I've ridden in. It's a '59 and was done long ago, and upgraded a lot along the way.
> 
> 
> Marko Mongillo's 1959 Fiat 600 "Fiamp"
> ...


I would love to have a word with him!

The motor i am planning is small. With a 96V system with will have amost triple the horsepower and the wheight distribution will be better, so i am thinking it will be a very fun car to drive and will still be safe on the road, because it is still only like 60HP...


----------



## djbills (Apr 7, 2010)

I don't know the AC side of things at all really, but I'd say 96v on a DC system would be just fine for that car. It would probably still do highway speeds and as long as you had the stock transmission, hills would not be a problem.
I'm a big fan of keeping the transmission, but I like the more visceral driving experience of having one. Although it's a little different experience from a gas car - you don't downshift to slow down (this is where brake regen could help) and generally when shifting up, it's a slower process where you kind of have to wait for the motor spin to slow down and then slip in with the... what's it called... synchro? Takes some getting used to. But it does allow you to go with lower voltages and better manage things like steep grades.
I will say on that note, if you go direct drive or one of the other options, it can help to up the voltage quite a bit to compensate with the low end. I mean, name a modern factory production car that's not running 300+ volts.
Again, I can only comment from a DC perspective and there's definitely a limit to my technical understanding, so take it for what it's worth!
I've learned to basically ignore HP ratings as they previously applied to gas vehicles - it's not the same. I remember my old 9" motor in my Electravan was rated at 28 hp. Ha! It was NOT putting out 28 hp - but even whatever the number was at higher voltage and advanced, it would still be super underwhelming. But yet I could roast the tires in first if I wasn't careful - the low end torque is there and your foot can summon it on demand. At a certain point, the power band will taper off and a stock gas motor will start outperforming as you get up into highway speeds, but at the low end (where you're city driving most of the time) the engines can't touch the motors! And this is where I think the motor size needs to be taken into careful consideration and match the car and weight class.
There are technical explanations out there that can explain the differences and put it into terms for former gassers to better understand, but yeah I think you would hugely benefit from a couple of emails with Marko - he or someone else who's converted a 600 will be, by far, your best bet to bounce things off of and hit the sweet spots in terms of over engineering or under.
He's dealing with the wildfires around here right now, but if I bump into him I'll mention the thread and see what he thinks. But don't be afraid to email that address listed on evalbum - probably still has it!


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

djbills said:


> I'm a big fan of keeping the transmission, but I like the more visceral driving experience of having one. Although it's a little different experience from a gas car - you don't downshift to slow down (this is where brake regen could help) and generally when shifting up, it's a slower process where you kind of have to wait for the motor spin to slow down and then slip in with the... what's it called... synchro? Takes some getting used to. But it does allow you to go with lower voltages and better manage things like steep grades.


A multi-ratio transmission does help performance with a motor and battery combination which can't produce adequate power over a wide enough range - that's why modern EVs use a high battery voltage (to enable high-speed operation), high current capability (for low-speed power), and power limited by the controller in between... for a wide power range and only a single transmission ratio needed.

Shifting manually certainly is part of being engaged in driving, and I prefer a manual with an engine, but for a vehicle designed from the beginning as an EV anything other than a single-ratio transmission would be difficult to objectively justify. You don't downshift to slow down with an engine any more, either (in a vehicle made in the last half-century or so), but engine braking is helpful and appropriate to keep speed from rising while descending a long and significant grade, and engine speed must be high to brake effectively so downshifting is required. In an EV the situation is very different: regenerative braking is normal, and if the drive configuration is suitable for propelling the vehicle without shifting gears, it's suitable for regenerative braking without shifting, too.

The slow shifting process with an electric motor in most conversions is the result of how crudely the typical conversion is done. If it includes a clutch then upshifts and downshifts are both the same as with an engine but no ability to double-declutch; if a clutch is not included the huge rotational inertia of the motor keeps the transmission input shaft speed from changing quickly, and forces the synchronizers (which are little metal clutches for each gear which force speeds to match before the gear is engaged) to do a lot more work than they would with a disengaged engine clutch. The proper fix would be to not use a clutch and to program the motor controller to use the motor to quickly adjust the input shaft speed to be right for the next gear (so synchronizers wouldn't even be needed if this is designed properly)... but since production EVs don't shift gears, EVs are generally not set up to do this.

If you have a conversion with a clutch, you could try downshifting by shifting to neutral, then "blipping" the accelerator to speed up the motor and input shaft, then pressing the clutch pedal and engaging the lower gear; however, applying power to a unloaded motor like this is generally not a good plan because it speeds up too quickly, and a DC motor without a controller limiting motor speed could easily over-speed.


----------



## djbills (Apr 7, 2010)

brian_ said:


> but for a vehicle designed from the beginning as an EV anything other than a single-ratio transmission would be difficult to objectively justify.


Curious - what do you consider the minimum voltage to properly run a single ratio transmission (that covers most situations, hills etc) in a small car? I know it depends on a few factors, but just looking for a ballpark figure. I'd have to look up what the 600 transmission ratios were.


----------



## brian_ (Feb 7, 2017)

djbills said:


> Curious - what do you consider the minimum voltage to properly run a single ratio transmission (that covers most situations, hills etc) in a small car? I know it depends on a few factors, but just looking for a ballpark figure.


It depends on the motor, and on performance expectations. A larger motor could produce sufficient power by turning more slowly (thus requiring less voltage) while producing more torque (thus requiring more current). Modern EV motor configurations produce full rated power over about a 3:1 range of speeds, and reduced power proportional to speed (due to constant torque at the current limit) below that full-power range. The system needs to be able to provide enough power at high speeds (limited by voltage) and enough power at low speeds (limited by current). The lower the performance expectations at all speeds, the smaller the motor and lower the electrical power requirements can be.

In practice, normal production EVs run 360 V (nominal, from a 96S battery) and higher. The Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV can be driven entirely on battery, and runs only 300 V (nominal, from an 80S battery). I don't think I've heard of a highway-capable battery-electric or plug-in hybrid (so usable as a battery-electric for short distance) car with a less than 300 volt pack; however, it would be possible at the expense of a large motor and high current handling capability in the controller, wiring, and devices such as contactors.

Some DIY conversion builders report that despite using a multi-speed transmission, they normally drive at all times in the same gear... even with brushed DC series ("forklift") motors or aftermarket conversion low-voltage induction motors (such as those from HPEVS) at only 120 volts. I've never seen any of them publish performance data.


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

brian_ said:


> I don't think I've heard of a highway-capable battery-electric or plug-in hybrid (so usable as a battery-electric for short distance) car with a less than 300 volt pack


It depends on how you define "highway-capable":
the Th!nk A266 (1999 to 2002) had a Siemens induction motor rated 17kW (27kW peak), with 280A max provided by its controller (also Siemens). Voltage was 114V from NiCd-batteries. With that configuration the Th!nk (13" wheels) had a top speed of 85km/h (imho NOT highway-capable), but this because the inverter was limited to supply some 7800 rpm only.
I like this drivetrain, because it is compact (incl. the single-speed reduction and differential it fits easily in my Mini), weighs approx. 50kg, and the inverter is fully programmable. It drives the car (10"-wheels!) up to 105 km/h (pretty close to highway-capable, i think) currently, as the rpm limit is set to 10000 (Siemens specificied max. rpm). Some poeple report that the motor can do 12000 rpm, would result in some 125...130 km/h. I may try this some day. As I live in Germany, most people here still consider this as non-highway-capable.
I reach the top speed very quickly, and it feels as there is absolutely enough power to do the 130 km/h, and more. Nominal voltage is 144V now, torque is tremendous.

I am writing all this because the Fiat600 and the Mini share so many specifications and I guess this might be helpful for Alexandre.
You should anyway do some calculations (with motor torque, top rpm, power output (@xxxrpm) and see which acceleration you can get with that, and which top speed (you will need also wheel circumference, gear ratio(s), weight, resistance (cw)).
But I think that it is also good to learn from other's experiences. They may confirm your figures, or reveal you are on a wrong way.
This forum is the best source I could find up to now.
Good success to your project!
Markus


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> I am writing all this because the Fiat600 and the Mini share so many specifications and I guess this might be helpful for Alexandre.
> You should anyway do some calculations (with motor torque, top rpm, power output (@xxxrpm) and see which acceleration you can get with that, and which top speed (you will need also wheel circumference, gear ratio(s), weight, resistance (cw)).
> But I think that it is also good to learn from other's experiences. They may confirm your figures, or reveal you are on a wrong way.
> This forum is the best source I could find up to now.
> ...


Hey Markus,

I am basing my conversion a lot on this kit, and it seems to work very well on a low voltage system (72V i think). 









My Fiat is the 600D so it has more space and i can add one more tesla Model S module so it will have a 96V system. I Think it will have a very good performance and will be capable of going on highways but i still need to do the maths to know that for sure!

Thank you for the response!


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

Hello!

A little update on the project i am doing, this is the 3D model for my EV Fiat 600:














































The parts i finally decided on using are as follow:


HPEVS AC20 electric motor (72V) 48cv and 93Nm. Original was 30cv and 55Nm
Curtis 1238E-7621 with cooling plate. 72V-96V nominal
Curtis FP10 potenciometer (or one from a used car)
3 Tesla model s batteries. I am doing the project to be able to have 4 batteries if i feel like the 48cv and 93Nm are not enough
Elcon 3,3kw UHF charger. Will fully charge in about 5 hours
Elcon DC/DC 1kW converter
J1772 inlet and cord
Orion BMS 2
TBS expert modular battery monitor
GV240 contactor and HBD41 switch from gigavac
Emergency button from curtis ED80
Inertia switch
Pre resistor system for the controller

What do you think?

Cheers!


----------



## EBianchini (Oct 13, 2020)

Hey nice thread, what scanner did use to creat the car body in CAD? Looks like a pretty accurate recreation of the body...I have CAD but didn’t think I would use it for my conversion... I have a fiat 500 Bianchina That I’m converting w DC sepex motor the transmission is very small and light w alloy case on these 500 cars, 600 is slightly bigger than 500 but I can easily lift either to move around in the shop. Fabricating the adapter plate is my next project, I’d Maintain the gear box stock if I were you, and use the clutch and flywheel, that keeps most of drive train original for inspection to make it legal it will be less changes. It also allows you to have low and high ratios available which can extend the operational range using 4th above 45mph perhaps? What does the dc dc converter do, just keep the 12V system charged?


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

youngestEVer said:


> fantastic job on the renderings! Very cool to see. Parts list looks good, and i love the elcon charger and DCDC converter. Good combo and works great with the Orion BMS.
> 
> I’m a dealer for all of these parts, I think we spoke before. I can get you a discount on all of this to help you out.Email me [email protected]
> 
> and I’ll let you know how much I can discount. Once again, great job on those renderings! Oh! I can also build you a custom CAN bus display to work with the Orion BMS if you want. We can incorporate fiat on there as well if you’re interested.


Hello,

I have sent you an email, thanks!


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

EBianchini said:


> Hey nice thread, what scanner did use to creat the car body in CAD? Looks like a pretty accurate recreation of the body...I have CAD but didn’t think I would use it for my conversion... I have a fiat 500 Bianchina That I’m converting w DC sepex motor the transmission is very small and light w alloy case on these 500 cars, 600 is slightly bigger than 500 but I can easily lift either to move around in the shop. Fabricating the adapter plate is my next project, I’d Maintain the gear box stock if I were you, and use the clutch and flywheel, that keeps most of drive train original for inspection to make it legal it will be less changes. It also allows you to have low and high ratios available which can extend the operational range using 4th above 45mph perhaps? What does the dc dc converter do, just keep the 12V system charged?


Hello,

I didnt used a scanner, i drew it all myself using CATIA software and the pictures of all the views of the car.
Yes, i am thinking of maintaining all of the transmission system to make it easier to make it legal. I think the adapter plate i drew will fit nice.
Yes it is to keep the 12V battery charged since we no longer have the alternator. It is really important since the contactores work with 12V. They are used to connect and disconnect the energy from the batteries to the controller (starting the car).


----------



## EBianchini (Oct 13, 2020)

Nice job thank for the reply, CATIA is very good software, I have SolidWorks, but so far I think I’m okay w out 3D modeling my conversion. I will watch your build thread. I’m doing a less expensive conversion myself, at least trying to keep cost down...what made you go w AC motor for such a small car?


----------



## alanfuertes (Sep 4, 2020)

alexandrept21 said:


> Is the car still running okay? Great project to see!


Yes, still working fine


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

EBianchini said:


> Nice job thank for the reply, CATIA is very good software, I have SolidWorks, but so far I think I’m okay w out 3D modeling my conversion. I will watch your build thread. I’m doing a less expensive conversion myself, at least trying to keep cost down...what made you go w AC motor for such a small car?


Because the AC system is much more eficient than the DC systems. Yes i pay a little bit more but i think i will get a much more realiable system. And most of the USA and Europe companies prefere to use the AC system so... I think i will be better with that. But if you have a different idea i would like to know!

Thanks for te reply!


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

I agree with You: AC is state of the art.
AC controllers were not available (or very expensive!) in earlier times, hence the earlier dominance of DC. Regenerative braking was very hard to realize, only some DC-controllers do that. Efficiency is bad, and you need to verify (and replace) the DC-motor's brushes regularly.
In a daily driver, I only see advantages nowadays to go for AC.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> I agree with You: AC is state of the art.
> AC controllers were not available (or very expensive!) in earlier times, hence the earlier dominance of DC. Regenerative braking was very hard to realize, only some DC-controllers do that. Efficiency is bad, and you need to verify (and replace) the DC-motor's brushes regularly.
> In a daily driver, I only see advantages nowadays to go for AC.


Exactly! I think its well worth the money


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

Is the difference between AC and DC substantial?
To be honest; I would expect that AC is becoming cheaper than DC meanwhile.


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> Is the difference between AC and DC substantial?
> To be honest; I would expect that AC is becoming cheaper than DC meanwhile.


Just based on the fact that the DC motors require more maintenance work and on the fact that is less eficient, i think it makes the difference substantial. Since i am doing this project as a thesis, i had to study all the types of motors and i came to the conclusion that all the AC motors are better than the DC. And because of the AC becoming much cheaper in the past years i feel like making it DC was not the best option


----------



## schelle63 (Jan 3, 2018)

I was referring to your statement "...it is well worth the money...", so I assumed that buying a DC-system would be cheaper than an AC, and I wonder if there is a big difference...


----------



## alexandrept21 (Sep 6, 2020)

schelle63 said:


> I was referring to your statement "...it is well worth the money...", so I assumed that buying a DC-system would be cheaper than an AC, and I wonder if there is a big difference...


Yes its cheaper


----------



## OIger (Jul 6, 2021)

alexandrept21 said:


> Hello!
> 
> A little update on the project i am doing, this is the 3D model for my EV Fiat 600:
> 
> ...


*
I Had the same i have the same idea only with the
HPEVS AC-23
i bought a 3d model from turbo squid
3D Model imported in Blender 3D*
*
































*


----------

