# EViero, AC31/SE100 Fiero build



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

More pics here: http://s550.photobucket.com/albums/ii419/JRP3_photos/

Videos here: http://www.youtube.com/user/JRP3

Lets try some embedding: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GizGo2NA0PE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2MrY0htkbM

OK, not happening.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Hey congrats on the progress and first ride!  I didn't realize you had it this far along. It must feel good...


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah, it's only taken me a year


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

About time you started a thread! Looks like it is mostly complete. How long before a road test? Congratulations on getting it rolling!


----------



## dimitri (May 16, 2008)

Whoa, I never thought I'd see the day JRP3 starts a build thread 

Subscribing and reaching for popcorn.....


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I'll need a real throttle before I take it on the road, unless I'm feeling adventurous, not to mention insurance and plates, so it will probably be a little while. I'm a bit worried about some noise in the transmission, never drove it as an ICE so don't know if it was there before or not. I really don't want to take everything out to investigate  
Throttle response is a bit strange, as you mentioned. You hit the throttle and not much happens, then suddenly I'm spinning the wheels as the torque comes on, (in the snow).


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

dimitri said:


> Whoa, I never thought I'd see the day JRP3 starts a build thread


Had to happen eventually


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Yeah, it's only taken me a year


That's Warp Factor 9 in my book. Remember, I actually started in 2005!  I'm doing a scratch build, that was originally an ICE vehicle, but have spent most of the last year _talking_ about how I am going to convert it to EV! 

I'm trying to catch you though - as I was typing this the UPS truck pulled up with my two chunks of aluminum for my motor mounts! 

Congrats again man. Makes me want to drive all the way to NY to see it, and bum a ride.


----------



## Lordwacky (Jan 28, 2009)

No BMS? Just curious because my I'm starting to think my Elithion is a $2k POS that isn't worth the silicon it was made out of...


----------



## Jan (Oct 5, 2009)

Lordwacky said:


> ...my Elithion is a $2k POS...


Why's that, Lord?


----------



## Lordwacky (Jan 28, 2009)

I don't want to Hijack this thread. I'll give a quick blurb and if you want more you PM me. I'm mostly just voicing a bit of frustration as I tried to get my car on road before I had to leave the country and I failed... now my car gets to sit for a year waiting for me to finish the 1 week of work I have left to do. I was in part derailed by the elithion

The Elithion doesn't have very good flexibility (so it would seem) it doesn't recognize all my battery banks. I'm not sure what the issue is, now I'm going to need to completely disassemble my build to try to figure out what is going on. The "brain" has no troubleshooting capability as far as I can tell, it can't even tell me what banks are working what ones aren't... 

It seems to have been designed by a person that doesn't understand with an EV conversion you are forced to place batteries wherever they fit and if that means you need to stick 12 in the trunk and 6 next to the motor and 15 in the front and 4 in the radiator compartment because that is where they fit, then that is where they need to go and the BMS needs to have to the flexibility to accommodate that need. Meaning you have to have complete flexibility regarding bank sizing , orientation, etc. Instead they kind of imply that they want to you design your battery banking and orientation around the limitations of their hardware. 

Plus build quality in my opinion is pretty mickey mouse for a $2k + product. the board is hard mounted to one battery post and joined to the other post with a wire. the board just kinda sticks up in air and seems exposed and vulnerable to any kind of impact (which I admit will be protected within battery, or should be at least). The Stupid clips they use to daisy chain the sensors together are a pain and big and get in the way, the wire doesn't go into them well, and if you made a mistake there is no good way to get it out, because when you stick a screw driver in the release slot like you supposed to it doesn't work. Why couldn't just put a little Phoenix contact screw terminal on the board or use some kind of low profile quick connect.

Bascialy it was really expensive, looks like something I built myself and it is giving me problems, the developers seem to have no desire to support their product without forcing you to pay more for it and my distributor doesn't have much experience with it either, so here I am in the field left high and dry trying to make this thing work and my only real option is to throw more money into the bottomless pit. 

I don't want to Hijack this tread so if you want to reply.... please PM me. I didn't want to start a thread becasue I'm out of the country and away from build so no resolution would be found for quite sometime.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Congrats again man. Makes me want to drive all the way to NY to see it, and bum a ride.


Don't start heading East until I at least get a proper throttle installed


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Lordwacky said:


> No BMS? Just curious because my I'm starting to think my Elithion is a $2k POS that isn't worth the silicon it was made out of...


No BMS, I don't think they are worth the expense or hassle for the most part. Dimitri's low cost BMS is the only one I would consider, but for now I'll keep an eye on the cells manually, I may get a single cell-log 8 to get a baseline for the cells http://hobbycity.com/hobbycity/stor..._Name=Cell-Log_Cell_Voltage_Monitor_2-8S_Lipo


----------



## dragster (Sep 3, 2008)

HI
86 the BMS you do not need it. Charge each battery to the top 14.2 then set your charger to trip off. After the first new charge check the pack voltage and if it is to the top then you are good to go. If it is not up to the top then turn up your charger up a Little & check it again.




Lordwacky said:


> I don't want to Hijack this thread. I'll give a quick blurb and if you want more you PM me. I'm mostly just voicing a bit of frustration as I tried to get my car on road before I had to leave the country and I failed... now my car gets to sit for a year waiting for me to finish the 1 week of work I have left to do. I was in part derailed by the elithion
> 
> The Elithion doesn't have very good flexibility (so it would seem) it doesn't recognize all my battery banks. I'm not sure what the issue is, now I'm going to need to completely disassemble my build to try to figure out what is going on. The "brain" has no troubleshooting capability as far as I can tell, it can't even tell me what banks are working what ones aren't...
> 
> ...


----------



## CFreeman54 (Jan 14, 2009)

Congratulations on the progress. Don't feel bad, I think I am heading toward year two of my Fiero build. I may have missed this somewhere but what brand of AC motor is that you're using?...and batteries?


----------



## Stunt Driver (May 14, 2009)

Good news! Congratulations on progress and on build thread!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

CFreeman54 said:


> I may have missed this somewhere but what brand of AC motor is that you're using?...and batteries?


AC31 motor from HGP/HPEVS, Curtis AC controller, and 36 SE 100 Ah cells from Sky Energy, (bought through EV components).


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> I may get a single cell-log 8 to get a baseline for the cells


 Very useful even if you have a bms since you can get a record of what cells are doing relative to each other during charge and discharge. Of course you can get enough info during charge with a dvm, but not during discharge, unless you have a friend who will hover over your battery boxes while you drive.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Maybe I could rig something up with mirrors


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Did some more test runs today, some harder accleration pulling over 300 amps for a second, felt good  Kind of like the trigger throttle, all I need is to replace the steering wheel with a joystick  Already got 25 amp max regen slowing from 20 mph so my controller may be setup more aggressively than Tom's was, have to see what happens when I hit the hills at speed.
Started playing with the pack a bit, one cell was 3.24, another 3.22, the rest around 3.17, so I bypassed the high one and charged the pack till the 3.22 cell was at 3.24, tomorrow I'll bypass that one as well and bring the rest of the pack up to around 3.24. Then I'll run the pack down to around 3 volts per cell and see how things look.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Then I'll run the pack down to around 3 volts per cell and see how things look.


 Keep a close eye on 'em JRP3. They start dropping pretty quickly below 3V. Make sure you are watching ALL of them. I know you know. Doesn't hurt to reinforce it though.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks Tom, I appreciate the concern, I've been living with these cells for months now, gotta take care of my babies  (Not sure if you've noticed but I sent you a PM.)


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Got the speedo working, found the mystery ground wire thanks to this guy http://elfieroev.blogspot.com/2008/11/needle-on-speedo-goes-up-and-down.html
who apparently got help from this guy http://fiero-ev.blogspot.com/
In case anyone is wondering this is the setup, yellow and purple/white wire from the VSS to the matching pins on the plugs, then ground wire from the plug to a ground bolt on the center tunnel:









Ground is second black and white wire from the right










Did some more balancing, paralleled a high cell with a low cell which brought them both in line with the rest of the pack.


----------



## lordryck (Nov 29, 2008)

I realize things aren't completely together, but what's your impression of the performance? I've been thinking about this motor/controller for a Miata EV but on paper it looks a bit small.

--Rick


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Well I've only had it up to 25 in the parking lot so can't tell you much, but I would think it would be good in a Miata as I think they are lighter than my 2500 lb Fiero.
*Edit: Weird voltage data was due to a bad multimeter.
However, I'm having problems, so I may not even be getting the real performance. I've been aware of a fairly loud hum/buzzing from the controller when it's powered up but not doing anything, Tom does yours do that? I suspect not, because when trying to read individual cell voltages with the controller turned on the cell voltages were showing 5-7 volts, even though the Curtis meter was only showing the correct 117 volts! Further more, when I put a volt meter on my 12 volt battery it showed 0 volts  When I turned off the controller everything went back to normal. So somehow the controller is running the 12 volt batter into the pack  When I shut off the controller the dash gauge shows error code 39, which is


> Main Contactor Did Not Close
> 1. Main contactor did not close.
> 2. Main contactor tips are oxidized,
> burned, or not making good contact.
> ...


I can hear the contactor opening and closing properly so it can't be 1,2 or 4.
You can hear the noise in this video after the contactor clicks
http://www.youtube.com/user/JRP3#p/a/u/0/GizGo2NA0PE


I guess I messed up some wiring but after a quick look over it all seems right.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Here's the wiring diagram. I'm not using a throttle switch so I just wired green to red. I thought if that were not connected the throttle wouldn't work, but as a test I disconnected it and the throttle still worked, so maybe that points to my problem.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Tom does yours do that?


 No. Strange it still ran with red (pin 25) disconnected from green (pin 9). I don't see how the controller is effecting the 12V system. It should be completely independent of it since it gets its power from the main pack via the relay supplied by HPGC and connected to blue wire, pin1. Is 12V connected to the coil side of this relay and the positive terminal of the pack to the switch side? The pack is isolated from chassis, correct?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> Is 12V connected to the coil side of this relay and the positive terminal of the pack to the switch side?


I think so. I have 12 volts from the key switch going to one of the small terminals on the relay and the other small terminal goes to ground. The positive from the + side of the pack on the main contactor goes to "COM" on the relay, (I assumed "C" in the diagram), "NO" from the relay goes to blue, pin 1. "NC" on the relay is not used.


> The pack is isolated from chassis, correct?


I thought so  I'll take some pics tomorrow if I can't figure it out.


----------



## lordryck (Nov 29, 2008)

I'll reference two previous messages:

If it runs with the green wire on pin 9 disconnected then the Interlock type is set to 1 or 2 (page 48 in the manual). You have the correct green wire I would presume?

A pre-conversion Miata is around 2300 lbs so no too far different from a Fiero.

--Rick


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks for the heads up, hadn't come across that in the manual.
Apparently all the weird voltage data was erroneous, bad multimeter, or more accurately one of the leads was about to fall apart, which it did this morning when I picked it up. Another meter had normal readings.
Still have the controller noise though, and the Code 39 contactor error. Tom is yours completely silent when powered up? 
Maybe there is something wrong with the contactor, even though it's brand new from HPG.
Checked all the wiring again, can't see anything wrong. Tried disconnecting the data port display plug, the menu push button, and the throttle, but still get the buzzing.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Tom is yours completely silent when powered up?


 Yes. When I turn off the fan blowing on it, I don't hear anything. Don't know about when driving. Have you called HPGC? I think I would return it.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Sent them an email, with a recording of the sound. Still waiting to hear back.


----------



## dimitri (May 16, 2008)

What AC frequency does controller run at ? Does the hum sound like the same frequency? Perhaps capacitor bank inside is loose or damaged and its not smoothing the battery current. Was it making this noise from the start even during first tests? Sounds like controller should be sent for repair. Its amazing that it still runs the motor, DC controller would probably release magic smoke by now


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It made the sound from the beginning, here's a better recording of it
http://www.youtube.com/user/JRP3#p/u/6/QW7_Ei-IBl0


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> It made the sound from the beginning, here's a better recording of it


 No way mine does that! Get HPGC on the phone.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

OK short story, it's probably the contactor. Long story, since the contactor is mounted on the same board as the controller and fairly close to it the frequency resonated enough that it sounded as if it was coming from the controller, even when I leaned over and put my ear near each one. I called HPG and Bill said I shouldn't have my Airpax breaker between the contactor and the B+ on the controller. When I took that out I also unbolted the contactor from the board, which isolated it and made it obvious that was the culprit since it still made noise even without the Aipax in line. I happened to have a new CzonkaIII contactor which I swapped in, no noise, but now no response from the motor, even though the controller powered up. Called Bill back again and he said, "Does the Czonka have an economizer?" Yup. No good, apparently "economizer" means precharge and of course the controller already takes care of that. So I take off the economizer, now the contactor starts clicking on and off really fast. Call Bill back and tell him the specs on the Czonka, which says 12-24 volt coil. Bill says the coil needs to be exactly 24 volts, so he's sending me a new Kilovac. The one I have is brand new, other than sitting on a shelf for almost a year, but hopefully that's the problem. If not the only thing I can think of would be the controller not properly PWMing the 24 volts to the contactor. Crossing my fingers till the new contactor arrives.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> OK short story, it's probably the contactor.


 Good to hear Bill is helping you. Nice to buy from people who help out when there are problems.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

OK, new twist on the buzzing issue. Just got an email from Brian at HPG saying:


> This is the sound of the PWM frequency to the main contactor, it is normal. Since you don't have any faults flashing, everything should be working normal. You will get a code 39 on power down since the contactor opens faster than the logic shuts down.




Tom, is your contactor located where you could hear it? Do you ever get a Code on power down? I don't get it each time and you have to be looking at the gauge to see it since it flashes quickly.


----------



## dimitri (May 16, 2008)

Why is contactor controlled via PWM signal? 

I thought PWM is used when you want gradual power levels, which is averaged surface under PWM pulses, but how does this apply to contactor where the function should only be on or off, nothing in between...

What am I missing ?


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

dimitri said:


> What am I missing ?


I think it's that a contactor really does benefit from being PWM'd. A contactor takes a lot of current to pull in, then a lot less current is needed for the other 99.99% of its time being pulled in. If you leave maximum current on the contactor all the time, you can waste a fair amount of power, and the contactor coil can get rather hot.

That's why many relays have "economisers" on them - a little circuit to give the coil a lot of current initially, and less for most of the time. The most efficient way to give less current to the coil is to PWM it.

Another consideration is that the considerable current for the contactor (of the order of an amp) needs to come from the pack voltage. A simple linear regulator would waste a lot of power, heating up the controller unnecessarily. For example if the pack is 115 V and the relay nominally 24 V but holds at 8 V, then ~1 amp times (115-8) = ~107 watts are wasted, when the relay itself only needs ~ 8 watts.

The original problem was presumably that the relay already had an economiser on it, so PWMing the input to an economiser circuit just doesn't work - it needs to be a bare contactor coil.

This is a similar concept to precharging, except that the current magnitudes are reversed in time. For precharging, you want to limit the current to the main capacitors to a safe value until they are charged, and then allow full traction current between the battery and capacitor from then on. For a coil economiser, you want maximum (but quite limited) current initially, and a quite reduced current (much less than half) from then on.

I'm not sure I like the idea of the controller attempting to PWM the main contactor. Contactors can vary a fair bit in how much current that they need, so it makes sense to match the economiser to the contactor and build it in to the contactor.

I wonder if there is a way of telling the controller not to PWM the contactor, or what duty cycle to feed it. (Looks up manual...) Looks like there is: Main_pull_in_voltage and Main_Holding_Voltage seem to be the relevant parameters. So it is posible that the most elegant solution to the problem would have been to set Main_Holding_Voltage to 100% * 24/96 (assuming a 24 V contactor and 96 V nominal pack) = 25%, and leave the original contactor with economiser in place. You'd want to make sure that Main_Driver_Battery_Voltage_Compensated_Bit0 is on, so it will compensate for the actual battery voltage (often a fair bit more than the nominal for this controller). You might need a largish capacitor across the contactor to smooth out the PWM, though.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

Brian from HPG said:


> This is the sound of the PWM frequency to the main contactor, it is normal.


I think it depends on whether the sound is just from inductors physically moving slightly as their current varies, which is OK, or whether it is the main contactor actually letting go a little when its power is off, and pulling in a bit more when the power is on. If the latter, the main contactor might be prone to letting go when driving over a bump, for example, which could cause various forms of havoc.

Besides the obvious problem of the noise being annoying, I'd really strive to minimise that noise. Since the controller is expecting a bare contactor coil, perhaps that is the best thing after all (i.e. don't use a contactor with an economiser).

In the post above, I initially assumed that the contactor coil was being PWMd from 24 V (or whatever its nominal voltage is), but it seems that it is PWMd from the pack voltage. In retrospect, a capacitor to smooth out the PWM voltage isn't what is needed, or if used, it needs an inductor in series with it. Otherwise, the PWM transistor will see effectively a short circuit when it turns on initially. You already have an inductor of suitable size, the contactor coil.

Sorry for the confusing advice.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Tom, is your contactor located where you could hear it? Do you ever get a Code on power down? I don't get it each time and you have to be looking at the gauge to see it since it flashes quickly.


 It is in an aluminum box, mounted on an aluminum tray above the motor/transmission. I can't hear it in the cabin, but I can hear a low level pulsating buzz (similar to that due to eddy currents in a transformer, but pulsating - due to the PWM I guess) if I stand at the engine compartment with the hood open. Opening the box lid verifies that it is coming from the contactor. It is not as loud as your recording, but then that depends on how close your mic was and its gain. So I guess it is normal - and Brian would know. But what about you car having low power?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> But what about you car having low power?


I didn't actually say I was experiencing low power, just that the car *may* not be performing fully because I thought there was a problem with the buzzing and the weird voltage readings I was getting. The buzzing is apparently normal, and the weird voltages was from a bad multimeter, so I assume the vehicle is performing as it should. Still have work to do before I do any road testing, not to mention registration, plates, etc.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Coulomb said:


> I think it depends on whether the sound is just from inductors physically moving slightly as their current varies, which is OK, or whether it is the main contactor actually letting go a little when its power is off, and pulling in a bit more when the power is on. If the latter, the main contactor might be prone to letting go when driving over a bump, for example, which could cause various forms of havoc.


Since that would be unacceptable behavior I'd assume that's not the case. 


> Besides the obvious problem of the noise being annoying, I'd really strive to minimise that noise.


I think I'll try to put the contactor in a rubber mounted plastic box.



> In retrospect, a capacitor to smooth out the PWM voltage isn't what is needed, or if used, it needs an inductor in series with it. Otherwise, the PWM transistor will see effectively a short circuit when it turns on initially. You already have an inductor of suitable size, the contactor coil.


So are you saying that a cap could be used to smooth out the PWM, and you would not need an inductor since the contactor coil is one? Or are you saying a cap won't work at all?


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> So are you saying that a cap could be used to smooth out the PWM, and you would not need an inductor since the contactor coil is one?


Oops, no. IF you use a capacitor, you'd need an inductor in series with it, and not the contactor either. So that would just be annoying, having to have an external inductor and a capacitor, when the contactor is already an inductor.

However, that might be the best way to get rid of the noise. But let's see what the right sort of contactor is like first.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It's gotten a little confusing with all the changes I've made, but just to be clear, I am using the recommended contactor, without an economizer. At one point I tried swapping in another contactor with an economizer, which of course did not work, then I took the economizer off that contactor, which still did not work because the coil says 12-24 volts and I guess it needs to be exactly 24 volts. Now I have returned to the original, correct contactor, and it operates as before, buzzing away but properly powering the controller.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Latest, and hopefully final, chapter in the contactor saga. Received a new contactor from HPG and it is MUCH quieter than the original, I have to get pretty close to hear it. So the original was faulty, though still functioning. Had a moment of slight panic when the motor would barely turn over and no RPMs were showing on the gauge, but it was just the plug from the motor encoder had come loose. I had pulled the motor to see if I could find anything that might be causing my transmission noise but everything looked normal and nothing showed any wear, so it's in the transmission and may be normal, just unheard over the old ICE. Trans may have been low on fluid which could be part of the problem, and I only hear it when I rev the motor in neutral. I'll worry about it if something breaks, I have no intention of tearing apart the transmission if the vehicle can still move. I might keep an eye out for a replacement Getrag which is supposed to be a better transmission.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Good to hear the contactor issue is resolved. My transmission is noisy too, really growls in 1st gear and could be heard over the ICE when it was in the car. Other gears are fairly quiet, the higher the quieter. It also seems the colder it is, the more noisy.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

What's yours sound like when revved in neutral?


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Received a new contactor from HPG and it is MUCH quieter than the original


So what brand/model is the new, quiet contactor? Is it a different model to all the ones you've tried so far?

It may be that Curtis had a contactor with particular characteristics (e.g. rather high or rather low inductance) when designing the contactor driver. So it may be important to get a contactor that is electrically similar to the one it was designed for, at least to minimize noise.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> What's yours sound like when revved in neutral?


 Quiet, only makes noise when in gear and under load. Worst is when cold and up hill in first gear.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Coulomb said:


> So what brand/model is the new, quiet contactor? Is it a different model to all the ones you've tried so far?
> 
> It may be that Curtis had a contactor with particular characteristics (e.g. rather high or rather low inductance) when designing the contactor driver. So it may be important to get a contactor that is electrically similar to the one it was designed for, at least to minimize noise.


I don't have it in front of me right now but it was the same contactor, A Kilovac LEV 200 something, 24 volt coil. Brian from HPG says "sometimes they make noise".


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Nice weather got me excited so I took the car off the blocks and did some more spins around the parking lot. Hit about 40 in second before I ran out of room, not sure what the RPM's were but it felt like there was more to go.
Waiting on some paperwork but I really want to see what this thing will do on the road. I have to finish my belly pan because everything in the motor compartment was covered in dust after my run, inherent problem with a mid engine design I guess.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

About time you got that thing moving some more JRP3. Hope to hear more performance reports soon.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> ... inherent problem with a mid engine design I guess.


With the Fiero's design it kind of is. The low pressure zone behind the rear glass helps pull air out of the deck vents, and with a high pressure zone under the car... You could probably also replace the vents with solid panels to prevent sucking any air that makes it past your belly pan up through the engine compartment.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah that's the plan, plus to keep rain out. Great design with an open vent letting rain water wash over the starting battery for years, leading to rust.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Main bellypan section, 4x8 sheet of Coroplast with some plastic strips to hold it in place so I don't have to remove a bunch of screws to work on the car.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Took my first real road trip today in the EViero  Only about 1 year and 3 months after I brought the car home and about 4 years after I actively decided I wanted to actually build a road going EV  Copilot Buzz strapped in for the ride, wasn't exactly sporting the EV grin but we hadn't started moving yet  










Drove the 3 miles home then dropped him off for the real testing, in case things didn't go well. Initial impressions, this car needs some handling work, probably starting with the almost bald 50 series front tires. Wide tires and manual steering, plus with the extra weight in the back, means the front end tends to wander a bit. I seem to have a lot of torque steer. When accelerating it pulls to the right, when I let off it lurches left. Haven't sorted the vacuum issues and the switch is acting up again so I'm running without boost. It still stops pretty easily, I think a manual master cylinder would really be fine on this car but I'll keep working on the vacuum system for now. I have a better check valve on order which should help.
Hit 60mph in second gear at 5800 rpm, only went to 65mph in third because of the steering issues. I do need to get my hands on the controller software or programmer, the regen is set much too low, as Tom found out. Most of the time I don't see more than 30 amps. Throttle ramp is lame as well, plus my throttle has a lot of throw before anything happens to begin with. I ended up with the Kelly foot throttle which feels pretty solid, but the spring is really stiff, and since it doesn't have a hinged pedal feels a bit weird. I'll probably have to do something to fix both issues. Hooked up the Chennic DC/DC, man that shoots a spark when first hooked up, scared the crap out of me  Seems to be working well, though switching it with the main contactor didn't work, the controller didn't like it, so it's just wired always on for now. I may leave it that way.
After bottom balancing the pack to 3.00 V per cell I charged to around 124 pack voltage, smallest capacity cell hit 3.5 when charging, the rest were between that and 3.43. According the the Kill a watt I put in 13.73kwh, figure efficiency of the charger plus batteries is around 90% that would mean 12.36kwh into the batteries. 36 100ah cells at 3.2 nominal would be 11.52kwh, but the cells are actually 110ah-114ah in reality. I'm recharging again right now after 17 miles of spirited driving so we'll see what sort of wh/mi. I'm getting. My new Celllog8 died a few days ago so no data from that  "Err:cell voltage" message when powered up, not sure what happened, see if I can return it for another.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

OMG, your dog cracks me up. VEEEEEEERY serious stuff happening here

My DC/DC throws a spark too. What would be ideal is a precharge circuit to start it up the same way as a controller. Brian also told me that running a 12V battery can also solve the problem but I am very greedy when it comes to range and would rather not do that. Maybe a small NiMH battery (drill gun variety or something).

Sounds like you had a great drive.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Actually I am running a 12 volt battery.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I haven't tried it with mine so I don't know for sure if it would make a difference. Do you have any ideas to solve the problem?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I assume it would only happen when initially hooking up the converter and the caps are getting their initial charge. Once hooked up it should not be an issue. The Chennic comes with an extra wire for switching it on and off which I assume includes a precharge circuit so that it doesn't spark each time it's turned on. Mine only sparked when hooking the pack negative cable and did not spark when I hooked up the switching wire, which for now is not switched and just wired to pack positive. If you are switching yours on and off with a contactor and it doesn't have it's own internal switching circuit then I'd guess you'd need a precharge resistor on it.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I forgot you had a switch on yours. Sounds like you are good to go then.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Hey! Congratulations! Sixty mph in 2nd at 5800 is better than I can do. If I recall correctly I am at about that rpm at 50 mph in 2nd. Buzz looks like he has spotted a problem. I didn't encounter a DC/DC spark, but I had it hooked up to the 12V battery when I connected it to the pack. It is connected to the main pack through a ssr. Haven't had any issues. The steering sounds wild. What do you think is the cause? Your celllog8 died? Man, you just got it! That belly pan looks slick! Full length of the car? I only put one under the engine compartment.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> I didn't encounter a DC/DC spark, but I had it hooked up to the 12V battery when I connected it to the pack.


First time I hooked it up it was not hooked to the 12 volt and it sparked, the second time it was hooked to the 12 volt and it still sparked.


> The steering sounds wild. What do you think is the cause?


The tires for one, maybe some loose steering gear, not sure what's going on with the torque steer, hopefully some of the Fiero pros will have some ideas.


> Your celllog8 died? Man, you just got it!


 Yup  It started by giving weird values when hooked to more than 3 cells, then sometimes it gave the error message, then all the time. I took it apart but couldn't see anything burnt.


> That belly pan looks slick! Full length of the car? I only put one under the engine compartment.


Yes full length. I wonder if it might be adding to the steering issues by giving more lift in the front, I'll try some runs without it and see if there is any difference. I used some U channel strips to hold the back edge of the bellypan and they seem to have blown off during the drive so there is some pressure flowing through there. I did not block off the front intake, thinking the airflow would blow out the wheel wells and help cool the brakes, but that might be a mistake.


----------



## CFreeman54 (Jan 14, 2009)

Congratulations JRP3! I hope I can get my Fiero on the road soon too. 

Eric at Held Motor Sport suggested I replace or rebuild the steering rack on mine to improve handling, since i went to the trouble to replace the suspension, but I plan to see how it handles first before I decide; that sounds like a big job....and there aren't any new Fiero steering racks laying around at the Pontiac Dealer.....Oh yeah, no Pontiac Dealers either! Just finding a new replacement rack is the first big job.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Is your belly pan parallel to the road surface from front to rear?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> ...Initial impressions, this car needs some handling work, probably starting with the almost bald 50 series front tires. Wide tires and manual steering, plus with the extra weight in the back, means the front end tends to wander a bit. I seem to have a lot of torque steer. When accelerating it pulls to the right, when I let off it lurches left...


It sounds like you ave a few different issues going on. Bad tires would definitley exacerbate the other issues and make things feel even worse. Air under the front end has been known to cause front-end lift and _fuzzy_ handling, but that is normally felt at speeds closer to triple digits than you just did. Not saying it's impossible, but it wouldn't be my first thought.


Here's where I would put my money:
You probably have worn struts/shocks that are allowing the car to transfer more weight during acceleration and braking than normal. If so, they may actually be helping you find a more serious problem before it bites you in the  ! 
I don't remember how much weight, if any you have added, but it sounds like you _may _have significantly changed the f/r weight distribution. I think it's 47/53 stock. If you've added more weight in back (and especially if you have worn shocks) it could be pitching radically during accel/decel. This is a problem with Fieros, from the factory. One of the things that took me so long to sort out on my chassis was finding the info in the countless thousands of threads in PFF that dealt with the issue, then developing a plan to correct it before I welded the Fiero suspension into my chassis. They have pro-dive front suspension geometry, and pro-squat rear geometry. Curiously, I guess because you're seated pretty much centrally, you don't realize how much pitch there is. If you've added weight to the back, and especially if you have worn shocks, you could be experiencing additional pitch changes.
Here's why that's an issue: The (84-87) rear suspension's other flaw is the tie rods that set the rear wheel toe are not lined up with the lower control arm pivots. That means they're traveling in two different arcs, and through the range of travel there is a LOT of toe change. Simplified even more - as your car's rear suspension moves through its range of travel your wheels are turning!  Good ol' bumpsteer! So if you're pitching back and forth more than normal, and using even more of that travel, you should definitely feel the car attempt to go to and fro across the road.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

david85 said:


> Is your belly pan parallel to the road surface from front to rear?


Yes, though it pitches up a little in the rear for the last foot or so.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Here's where I would put my money:
> 
> You probably have worn struts/shocks that are allowing the car to transfer more weight during acceleration and braking than normal. If so, they may actually be helping you find a more serious problem before it bites you in the  !
> I don't remember how much weight, if any you have added, but it sounds like you _may _have significantly changed the f/r weight distribution. I think it's 47/53 stock.



I think I should be close to the stock weight with about 300lbs of batteries and 100lbs of motor and adapter, but I do have 200lbs of battery weight in the rear trunk area so it's probably ass heavy compared to stock. In fact all the battery weight is behind the rear wheels. Wheelie time!  I do plan to relocate at least half of that weight into the tank tunnel, may need to do it sooner rather than later.


> [*]Here's why that's an issue: The (84-87).....



Mine's an 88 so I assume that's not the problem. Frankly I think a big part of it is the front tires, I had a similar problem with a 70 Cougar with 60's on the front, it pulled all over the place until I replaced them with new 70's. I just need to figure out how narrow a tire I can put on these rims, I don't want to buy new ones.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Mine's an 88 so I assume that's not the problem. Frankly I think a big part of it is the front tires, I had a similar problem with a 70 Cougar with 60's on the front, it pulled all over the place until I replaced them with new 70's. I just need to figure out how narrow a tire I can put on these rims, I don't want to buy new ones.


Yeah, I didn't remember that you have an 88. Your rear suspension design is fine, and there shouldn't be any bumpsteer.

However! 


JRP3 said:


> ...I think I should be close to the stock weight with about 300lbs of batteries and 100lbs of motor and adapter, but I do have 200lbs of battery weight in the rear trunk area so it's probably ass heavy compared to stock. In fact all the battery weight is behind the rear wheels...


You have, in fact, significantly altered your car's weight distribution! You removed the gas tank and cooling system, then placed all the weight you removed with the ICE back in the car behind the rear axle centerline. You have, in effect, altered your mid-engined Fiero to have the handling dynamics of a rear-engined car. 200lbs is a lot of weight in the rear trunk. I used to tell people to put 100lbs in the front (over the spare) in the winter to get some weight on the front wheels. I never did on mine, because I thought going straight through intersections on snow and ice was funny (seriously, I did). I was trying to power slide through, but couldn't consistently catch it just before the front started to push. When there was traffic on the road I just slowed to a crawl and eased my way around the corner. 

It may be your front tires, but you should address the weight distribution issue before you begin driving it a lot. Or just be extra careful. Fieros, like many mid-engine cars have a tendency to exhibit snap oversteer. Once the momentum of the rear end stepping out reaches a certain point - she's coming around. I've felt that twice before. Once was playing on exit ramps in a light drizzle. Through the last right bend that would put me on the other highway, it just kept turning, and turning... I did a 360 onto the other road - luckily no one was coming. The other I fell asleep after being up for an ungodly amount of time (but still driving ) and drifted into the median. It hit the grass, the back end lost traction, and around I went - another full 360.

Sorry to be so longwinded, that's my specialty. Just trying to make the point that you don't want to have all that weight in back and hit something slippery. What if you move the spare to the trunk and put some of the batteries up there to balance it out?


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

I didn't block off the airflow in front either so there would be some flow to the motor and controller to cool them. I'm concerned there isn't enough for hot summer temps since the front battery box leaves only about 3" wide openings at each side by the headlights for air flow into the volume under the hood. I would guess moving some of your cells forward to the tank area would help quite a bit on the steering.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> However!
> 
> You have, in fact, significantly altered your car's weight distribution!


Yeah, I'm starting to realize that  I'm used to working on trucks where 300lbs on the bumper doesn't mean much.



> What if you move the spare to the trunk and put some of the batteries up there to balance it out?


Spare tire? That went so I could mount my charger there. I think once I move some of the cells into the tank tunnel and some others in front of the motor that should take care of the weight distribution issues.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Any thoughts on tire type and size? Currently the front is a 205/50/15 and the rear is 245/50/15. I'm leaving the rear as is for now but I'd like a little taller and narrower in the front. Front comes out to about 23 inch tall and 8 inches wide, I think the rims are 7 inches wide. I'd like a 7 inch wide by 24 inch tall tire on the front, which looks like a 185/60/15, (I hate metric tire sizes, what was wrong with width by diameter like truck tires use?), low rolling resistance but still decent grip.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

What I hate about the metric system is that bazaar L/100 kilometer fuel economy rating. I calculate all of mine in terms of MPGs with 3.78L gallons. But yes, the way they measure with the tire profile with millimeters but still have inches for rim dimensions is annoying too. Tread profile also affects the overall tire size by up to 10% in the case of light truck tires even with matching size numbers.

Just did some brief looking at prius tires and they are available with 185/65/15. That gives you a tire width of about 7.3" and wheel height of about 24.5".

I never looked up prices of a prius tire but I'm thinking they might be more competitively priced since there are so many prius' running around and those should be LRR tires.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

After doing some research I don't think I'm going to be concerned with a LRR tire. They don't add that much efficiency that I can see, since I don't really do any highway driving the benefit will be even less, and there may be some question as to their grip, especially in the wet. I don't want to go above 24 inch diameter as that will make my front tires bigger than the rear, which will be goofy.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

I think you'll be fine with 185/60s. I have 185/65-15s on my daily driver and 6.5 or 7" aftermarket rims with no issues. I was getting ready to move and needed a couple tires for the trip. They didn't have my 195/60s in stock so I took what they had so I could be on the road ASAP. I meant to replace them but they've been doing just fine, so... It may end up being lower than 24" OD if the specs are measured on a narrower rim though.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Ended up with a 195/55/15 tire which was about 1 inch narrower than what I had and about 1 inch taller. Helped some but there are still some handling issues. This definitely needs an alignment but there is probably no point until I move the batteries.
While charging today I was leaning on the car and touched one of the controller to motor cables and got a nice little zap  Volt meter showed 50 volts between the frame and each of the 3 phase outputs from the controller. Controller was off of course, and I thought the motor would be isolated since all the mounts are rubber mounted. 
Did 25 miles last night, took 9350 wh from the wall, times 90% gives me 8415 wh, 337 wh/mi, GPS showed 32 mph average speed. That seems pretty high wh/mi for that speed, though I do have a lot of hills. I'll have to see how my wh/mi changes with stronger regen as I should have my hands on a programmer pretty soon  Tom do you happen to have the values you changed handy? If not I'll search your thread. I have them somewhere but can't find them at the moment.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> I'll have to see how my wh/mi changes with stronger regen as I should have my hands on a programmer pretty soon
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Under Torque Mode/Response I set Accel_Rate = 0.5 sec, Neutral_Braking = 50%
Under Throttle I set Forward_Map = 50%, and Forward_ Deadband = 0.25V
I set User_Overvoltage = 129% for 36 SE cells, Nominal_Voltage = 96V

I actually liked Forward_Map = 60% better for throttle control, but think it might be too touchy when easing off the throttle to control regen. I left everything else as it was when received. Drive and regen current limits were/are set at 100%. Motor is under torque control, mode 2.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks Tom that should save me some time. As for my wh/mi figures, I'm using 90% efficiency to calculate the PFC 30 + battery charging efficiency combined, does that sound about right from what you're seeing?


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> I'm using 90% efficiency to calculate the PFC 30 + battery charging efficiency combined, does that sound about right from what you're seeing?


 Yes, I think that is about right if I recall correctly. Seems I estimated about 88% from EKM power and battery current and voltage readings, but I believe it was at lower charging current, and closer to 90% at 30ADC charging current. I'll likely be charging tonight and can check again. Just finishing up remounting the controller with heat sink.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The heat sink data will be interesting. I haven't seen any elevated temps as my driving has been in under 65F ambient. 
The car passed inspection this morning, I'm all legal  I just registered it as the original vehicle because I was afraid there might be some issues with the original title and didn't want to stir things up further for now, so the mechanic looked at it as a gas vehicle. Luckily it's old enough that there are no emissions tests, though he did comment that a gas cap was required for inspection. I told him I could stick one on it but he agreed it was pointless since there is no tank. He took it for a quick test drive and was impressed. He's a hot rod guy who's into any custom type of build, I'm hoping I can get him interested enough to maybe help me in future builds.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Congratulations on passing inspection! 
I checked efficiency of my PFC30 today. Here are the numbers:
VDC IDC P (DC) P (EKM, at wall) Efficiency (%)
120.6 15.1 1821 1935 94.2
120.7 20.1 2426 2576 94.1
120.9 25.2 3047 3250 93.8
121.2 30.4 3685 3980 92.6

The EKM meter is mounted at the input to the charger and reads AC current, voltage, and power, and keeps a running tally of energy used. The DC readings are from the TBS gauge/shunt, and pack voltage read with a dvm as it and the Curtis gauge agree, but the TBS is typically about 0.5V lower.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks again for the info Tom. Went for a little cruise and made a video of the trip. Not great quality from my digital camera but you get the idea. Went up to 65 in fourth this time, steering is still a bit too wacked to do much more unless I find an empty, smooth, straight road. If you make it to around 4:40 when I take off from the stop sign I go from first to second and stay in second for the rest of the drive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzXUxyBToq0
The car isn't quite as loud as it seems in the video, but the motor is about 1.5 feet behind your head and the transmission is a bit noisy. Someday I may put in some sound proofing.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Sorry, but I claim the title of worst EV video ever.

My car comes across as being much louder in playback recording than it really is. Just the nature of audio recordings since quiet it may be, its still the loudest noise inside there. Personally I like the sound. The sigal flasher being so loud is the give away of how loud it really is.

I can't be sure, but I think I can actually see your torque steer happening in this video. Is it happening starting at 1:20 when you are accelerating?

Looks to be a zippy car, BTW.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

david85 said:


> Sorry, but I claim the title of worst EV video ever.


Can't argue with that 



> I can't be sure, but I think I can actually see your torque steer happening in this video. Is it happening starting at 1:20 when you are accelerating?


Probably, pulls when accelerating then pulls the other way when I let off to shift. I've gotten pretty good at compensating but it's still there.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Nice video! Looks like it accelerates well. Seems you are close to completion - just move some cells forward, a little front end work...?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

"Completion" is a relative term of course, but yes I'm getting closer. Next winter will be rust/body/paint work, but for now priorities are moving the batteries, dealing with the front end, and wiring the heater to the pack. One thing that puzzles me a bit is ever since I hooked up the DC/DC converter I get a "Code 14" about 20% of the time on startup, which is precharge failure or contactor failure, can't remember which at the moment. Turning the key off then back on fixes it each time. You ever see that error code? Also, I often have to press the button more than once to change the 840 display parameter, so I may have some gremlins.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> ...ever since I hooked up the DC/DC converter I get a "Code 14" about 20% of the time on startup, which is precharge failure or contactor failure, can't remember which at the moment. Turning the key off then back on fixes it each time. You ever see that error code? Also, I often have to press the button more than once to change the 840 display parameter, so I may have some gremlins.


 No, I haven't seen that error code, nor have the problem with the 840 gauge. Bad ground?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Certainly seems like some intermittent poor connection. I'll have to start grabbing wires.
On the steering issue, I found out that these came with steering dampers, and mine is missing. That will probably help the wandering quite a bit, though some feel that it makes the steering heavier with the damper. Still, I'll probably try replacing it since all the other components seem tight.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Apparently the '88 models did not come with steering dampers, so that's not a solution, unless there are after market setups.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Apparently the '88 models did not come with steering dampers, so that's not a solution, unless there are after market setups.


I was wondering about that when you posted it. The 84-87 steering damper was there to help compensate for the poor geometry of the original design, I believe. The 88's front and rear suspension are pretty good designs that don't really need a bunch of band-aids to deliver good handling.

Did you shake things around in back too, to make sure there aren't any worn parts? How about the alignment, that could make it kind of screwy if it was way off. My ex bought a Saturn that was all over the road. I thought it had a bad steering rack. I drove it home in bad winter conditions, and was totally unnerved by the time we got there. I don't usually fear much, but that was a crazy ride! It would be tracking straight and then just take off in one direction or the other. The ice and snow made it hard to catch and correct. I finally figured out that the culprit was extreme toe-out on the right front wheel. We took it for an alignment, and I told the guy my suspicion. He confirmed it, corrected it, and the car drives nice now.

The rear weight thing seems to be exaggerating some pre-existing issue.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I did a tape measure toe in adjustment as best I could, I think I'm within an eighth or so but not real confident in my measurements using the treads. I do need to check out the rear. Someone on Pennocks suggested the following:


> Your "torque steer" is in the rear suspension. Every 88 with poly in the rear has the problem where the "long bolt" loosens up. The "long bolt" is the one that goes through the knuckle, and through two poly bushings. You will need to add a jam nut and loctite. Otherwise, it will continue to loosen. I tightened mine, and in two weeks, it was loose again. I tightened it again... same thing. After three rounds of this, I added a jam nut and loctite. It's good now.


 Rodney Dickman added this


> This will be a common problem in the years to come. The holes gets egg shaped in the casting. I have a few ideas on how to make repair kits for this. I'll work on it someday soon I hope.


I'm not sure this is actually what's going on with mine as I recently had the bolt out and it was tight getting it back in, but I'll recheck again now that I know what to look for. Maybe I didn't torque it down enough as I didn't want to cause binding on the bushings.
In other news I did 35.4 miles on a charge tonight in mixed driving and ended up with just under 114 resting voltage on the pack immediately after stopping which is 3.166 per cell. I had my new Celllog8 hooked up to what I think are some of my "weakest" cells, the worst sagged to 2.44 under load near the end of the drive but came back to resting voltage of 3.13 after less than a minute when I stopped, the others were between that and 3.15. Average ambient temperature was around 50F. I'm recharging through my kill a watt so I'll see how much energy goes back in, but I think I could do 40 miles safely under similar conditions if I wanted to push the pack. The one weak cell seems to have the most resistance as it's not the first to hit 3.45 when charging but it does go higher than the rest more quickly soon after that. I'll have to check the data sheet that came with the cells to see how it compares.
I think I'll be severely testing these SE 100ah cells as all the fun seems to happen with 300+ amps draw


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Improved the steering issues quite a bit yesterday  They were right on the money, my right rear knuckle(?) bolt wasn't as tight as it should have been, so I tightened that down. I also did the alignment again and clamped metal bars to the wheels to measure against instead of using the treads. Much better, no more torque steer and less wandering.
Cross posting info from Tom's thread:
Yesterday I did 20 mile round trip in and out of town, return trip being mostly uphill all the way. A 1 mile steep grade at 55mph followed by about 6 miles of moderate uphill at the same speed left me with a 54C motor temp and 66C controller temp, air temp around 18C, 65F . My mid engine Fiero with a belly pan doesn't give good airflow to the motor and controller, my controller plate is right over the motor, plus I've been trying to seal off the engine compartment to eliminate dust and water. Obviously I'm going to have to concentrate on managing airflow in and out a bit better and will probably need a fan. I may try some shielding between the motor and controller as well to keep motor heat from migrating up into the controller.
I have one cell that seems to have smaller capacity and higher resistance than the others, it sags more under load and shoots up faster near the end of the charge cycle. It may be replaced if it won't play well with others.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> ...54C motor temp and 66C controller temp, air temp around 18C, 65F .


 Yeah, the same drive in 100 F outside temp would put you up at the controller temp limit. With the plate right over the motor it gets radiation from the motor. You would likely be fine with more air flow. Maybe you can add ducting to direct flow to the plate while moving, or add a blower? 'Course depends on whether you make that demanding a drive normally. Glad to hear the steering is improved!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yes I plan to play with some ducting first. Hills are the norm around here but luckily 100 degree temps are not, so I probably won't have to do much to keep things in line.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Congrats on the steering issues JRP3! What's the deal with the bolt loosening though? What causes a properly tightened bolt to loosen over time? Is there bind from the poly bushings or something? Just curious, because I never remember reading about that on PFF. Then again, I never had an 88 so I may have been so preoccupied with solving my Chevette/Citation suspension gremlins that I just didn't pay attention.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Congrats on the steering issues JRP3! What's the deal with the bolt loosening though? What causes a properly tightened bolt to loosen over time?


Probably not being properly tightened to begin with  When I put it back in I thought I didn't want to over tighten it and potentially cause binding. I guess I avoided that  The one guy from Pennocks said he had to use a jam nut and loctite on his, but I wonder if maybe his threads were worn or something.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Probably not being properly tightened to begin with  When I put it back in I thought I didn't want to over tighten it and potentially cause binding. I guess I avoided that  The one guy from Pennocks said he had to use a jam nut and loctite on his, but I wonder if maybe his threads were worn or something.


Guess I didn't pay attention again. I was thinking that the loosening bolt, and jam nut solution, were regular occurrences not one person's ordeal. Just glad you found the culprit.

As for all these little roadtrip/tests you've been doing - I'm happy for you, but a little jealous!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It's much more fun to drive than work on, but now that I can actually drive it I'm more motivated to work on it.  I waited to get it registered until it was working but I think knowing that I couldn't drive it legally lowered my incentive a bit.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Also, I often have to press the button more than once to change the 840 display parameter, so I may have some gremlins.


Bad button, checked it with a continuity meter and it makes contact less than half the time I press it.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Bad button


 Ah, good. Easy to find one at an electronics shop.



> It's much more fun to drive than work on


 It sure is!!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

New button from radio shack, changing modes like a maniac now 
Finally made up a cord and adapter for 240V 30A charging, but if I try more than 20 amps or so the Manzanita goes into over temp limit and cuts back. This is with the hood open and air temps of 65F last night and 80F today, I wouldn't think it should be such a problem. Anyone else have this experience?


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Anyone else have this experience?


 No. I have charged at temperatures as high as mid 70's, with the hood partially closed, and charger putting out 30 ADC for a bit over 3 hours with no problems. Something is wrong.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Something definitely wrong with the charger. Seems the over temp circuit is too sensitive and kicking in prematurely. I measured between 105-110 fan output temp on the charger depending on ambient when the cutback kicks in and Rich Rudman thinks that is around normal. However he also spoke of a fan upgrade, though if the temps are normal I'm not sure why I'd need one.
I got my hands on a Curtis 1311 programmer for a little while, this thing is pretty cool, lots of parameters to play with. I've tweaked a bunch of settings but don't have them with me at the moment. Saw over 170 amps of regen in first gear going down hill and hit overvoltage cutback on a full charge this morning and the controller shut down completely  Weird feeling going from strong regen to coasting. Cycled the key switch and it came back on, the programmer had a bunch of error codes in the history. Don't have them handy at the minute either  but one of them was a high throttle error. Seems my Kelly throttle is not returning to zero any more and when I lowered the throttle deadband setting below .50 it showed up. The car felt a bit jerky lately and now I know why. I really wanted a hall effect throttle to avoid this problem but didn't have the programmer to switch that setting. Now I do but I'm not sure I'd trust a Kelly, or if I can wait around for a throttle from China. Over a year into this build and still haunted by throttle questions


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I would *generally* think that hall effect sensors are better, so maybe it wouldn't be as risky. No one in north america carries anything like it?

Does your throttle have a cut off switch right at 0 throttle? I thought its supposed to be standard to have that on pot sensors.

My foot throttle has an audible "click" from an internal switch just before my foot comes all the way off. That way even with a wacky internal pot, the zero throttle signal is still zero when the pedal is fully released.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I have the same thought, a hall effect would be less likely to have problems. There are other hall effect throttles but quite a bit more expensive, at least that I've found.
The Kelly does have a cutoff switch and there is a click, but it's still putting out a signal before the click so something is wacked. The values jump up and down so it's no longer smooth at all. I'll probably open it up and look inside but I'm waiting to see what Kelly says first. Maybe I can exchange it for a hall effect.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Seems my Kelly throttle is not returning to zero any more and when I lowered the throttle deadband setting below .50 it showed up. The car felt a bit jerky lately...


I'm thinking that one of the parts you can least afford to go cheap on is the throttle sensor. I'm now looking at the Netgain unit; it has dual outputs that track 2:1 so you can always tell if there is a short to high or low or to the other output.

Of course, to take full advantage of it, you need a Netgain controller, or the Tritium Driver Controls, or a little micro of some sort.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Cheap doesn't always mean poor quality, but I know what you mean.

Here are some of the controller parameters that I've been playing with:

Accel Rate
Stock .5 sec
Now .1 sec

Accel Release Rate
Stock .4 sec
Now .6 sec

Neutral Braking
Stock 20%
Now 40%

Gear Soften
Stock 20%
Now 10%

Forward Map
Stock 50%
Now 60%

These all make the car feel more powerful, though not as smooth as stock, increasing the Accel release rate is an attempt to smooth out the transition when lifting off the throttle.
I expect when I solve my throttle issues things will feel smoother overall.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

I'm just using a Curtis PB6 and it is working fine so far. Haven't noticed any jerkiness. It is inside a box, so is staying fairly clean. I also added a second return spring to ensure it pulls to the stop when released and in case the original spring should break. Just a standard tension spring from Lowes.

Sounds like time to pack up the charger and return it.

I've not had the controller shut down, but have had it cut back on regen due to exceeding the user_overvoltage limit I set when going down the hill from my house. Pretty strange huh? Felt like the car accelerated because I was expecting it to slow as usual when I eased up on the throttle, but it didn't. The speedometer showed no significant increase in speed. Then I thought of user_overvoltage and checked regen current. There was very little. I then checked voltage and it was slightly over the user_voltage. I just stopped at the bottom of the hill with the mechanical brakes, then drove off on level ground. That discharged enough so that it didn't occur again. I would guess the throttle error shut off the controller in your case. I am not charging to quite as high a voltage now, so haven't had a recurrence. If I hadn't had a speedometer I would have swore the car accelerated.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> I'm just using a Curtis PB6 and it is working fine so far. Haven't noticed any jerkiness. It is inside a box, so is staying fairly clean.


The Kelly is an enclosed foot throttle, I thought it too would stay clean and work well. I don't see how my problems could be a dirt issue, unless it was included from the factory 


> Sounds like time to pack up the charger and return it.


Yeah, it's going back tomorrow, got an RMA from Manzanita. Not sure if it's going to be warrantied as Rich says they are all tested before shipping. Depends on what he finds when he opens it up I guess.


> I've not had the controller shut down, but have had it cut back on regen due to exceeding the user_overvoltage limit I set when going down the hill from my house. Pretty strange huh? Felt like the car accelerated because I was expecting it to slow as usual when I eased up on the throttle, but it didn't. The speedometer showed no significant increase in speed. Then I thought of user_overvoltage and checked regen current. There was very little. I then checked voltage and it was slightly over the user_voltage. I just stopped at the bottom of the hill with the mechanical brakes, then drove off on level ground. That discharged enough so that it didn't occur again. I would guess the throttle error shut off the controller in your case. I am not charging to quite as high a voltage now, so haven't had a recurrence. If I hadn't had a speedometer I would have swore the car accelerated.


Yes, strange feeling. I'm not sure what happened in my case, over voltage is set at 134 and I've never seen more than 127 with the increased regen, did the same drive today with a full charge and only hit 126 on the same hill. I'm going to try neutral braking at 35% to see what that does. Looks as if I'll be going back to the trigger throttle from the AMPhibian for a little while as the Kelly getting progressively worse and probably becoming dangerous. Won't be driving much anyway without a charger.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Kelly says they set throttle deaband at 1.0 in their controllers to eliminate noise issues, so I'll give that a try and see how it feels. They also say I could tie the throttle low and wiper together and connect them to the low input on the controller and connect the throttle high to the wiper input on the controller.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Somewhere along the way I forgot an important point that Bill from HPEVS mentioned a while ago: Nothing should be between the main contactor and the controller. Originally I had my Airpax circuit breaker between the contactor and controller, took it out, then put it back in when making some changes. I think that's where my Code 14 precharge failure was coming from, ever since I took it back out I haven't had that problem. It was still there when I had my controller shut down issue and had the following fault codes:
Main Contactor Welded (It's not)
Throttle Wiper High
Overvoltage Cutback
Main Open/Short
Precharge Failed.

So listen to Bill when he tells you something.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> So listen to Bill when he tells you something.


 I asked Bill if they use a breaker since I didn't see why it was required for AC, and he said no. So I returned the one I purchased from KTA.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I was of the same mindset but still wanted to have a way to physically disconnect the pack and I found a good deal on the Airpax, $100. I just need to put it before the contactor if I use it.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Here's the latest from Rich Rudman:


> Lets see, 240 volts at 30 amps is 7200 watts.
> The max output amps for a PFC30 is 40 amps, so... 40 amps times 123 volts is 4920 watts. This is the most you can expect the charger to deliver at these load points. This is only a 20.5 amp 240 volt draw.
> So.. You will only get the charger to draw 20.5 amps in the best of conditions. A bit more if you really only have 230 line volts.
> I am now wondering if the charger is making full output amps, but gets a touch hot and lights the thermal warning channel but really does not back off the current much. In this case turn the amps knob down, since it's not doing anything useful set wide open when it really in not going to pull more than %60 of it's 30 amp limit.
> ...


Tom, you said you charged at 30ADC output from the charger with no problems, but shouldn't you be getting 40ADC?
Have you ever charged with the controller powered up and reading amps from the 840? I was thinking of trying that to see how many amps are actually going into the pack.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Have you ever charged with the controller powered up and reading amps from the 840? I was thinking of trying that to see how many amps are actually going into the pack.


Luckily I had a moment of clarity and realized that won't work at all since the 840 only shows current flowing through the controller to the motor, and vice versa, not to and from the pack.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Tom, you said you charged at 30ADC output from the charger with no problems, but shouldn't you be getting 40ADC?


 I have only turned the current knob up all the way once I think. I think I got close to 40ADC, I at least remember it going above 38ADC, as measured by the shunt/TBS. I usually just set it for 30ADC though - didn't want to run it at max all the time, but it would probably be fine. At 30ADC I pull about 16A AC from the wall, at 238 to 240V AC.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Much excitement lately with the EViero. Playing with the programmer I thought I'd crank the regen and see what happened. 140 volts and a controller shutdown is what happened . I was using the programmer to monitor voltage, it shows pack voltage and capacitor voltage, and even after the shutdown the capacitor voltage stayed at 140 which is why I was able to see what it maxed out at. Cycling the keyswitch reset it and started it back up.
Since I've changed the controller to have more aggressive response I've also been driving it more aggressively. That, coupled with some lower temperatures, caused me to slightly overextend my range today. I wasn't paying close attention and noticed pack voltage dropping fairly quickly a few miles from home. It was mostly flat with a little downhill so I thought I'd push it. The controller started cutting back pretty hard and I saw voltage drop to 64 volts under load, that's 1.777 per cell  Got a little regen in and made it home, cells were at 2.3 and climbing when I got out and started checking. Luckily since I bottom balanced them none of them were taken near zero volts and they seem to be recharging fine. I may have lost a few life cycles but all seems well.
Did I mention I'm really pushing these SE cells 
Picked up a clamp on current meter to see what the PFC30 is really putting out when the temp cutback limit light comes on. I was getting 38 amps before it came on and 35-36 when it was on, so it's not much of a cut back. However, it was 45F degrees out and the air out of the PFC was only 80F, so I still don't see why it's coming on at all. I'll have to see what it does in higher temps but at this point it's not enough to send back.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Woohoo! Ride those SEs into the dust! I agree they are likely fine, but some cycles lost. I am still using 2 that were around 1.9V, and they are behaving similarly to the others. The Curtis has a lot of safety features built in - good thing! Lucky you didn't fry something. The charger still doesn't seem right to me. I've never had overheating, but then I don't run mine that high.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Any chance I could talk you into cranking it up on your next charge to see what happens? Mine seems to cut back after about 15-30 minutes.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Test results for Manzanita PFC30: ambient temperature 74 F, turned up current knob all the way and max'ed at 37.7A. Over the next 5-7 minutes it climbed to 39A. I then adjusted it back to 38A. It crept back up to 38.5A and I adjusted it down to 38A again. It then stayed there until it overtemp'ed at about 17 minutes from the start, and cut back to 30.5A. I adjusted it down to 30.1A and it ran there happily until it hit the voltage limit a couple hours later and started cutting back. It is a PFC*30* you know.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks for the test data Tom. Sounds as if mine is behaving the same as yours and my "crank it up and rip the knob off" mentality just made me aware of the limits.



tomofreno said:


> It is a PFC*30* you know.


Yes but I assume that is the max it can draw from the line. Even Rich says it should be able to put out 40ADC to a 120VDC pack from a 240VAC 30ADC line at normal temperatures. He does say it's very inefficient though. I still don't see why mine "overtemps" at 45F ambient and 80F fan output, but it's not cutting back enough to worry about.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Yes but I assume that is the max it can draw from the line.


 Mine was drawing 43.4A peak and 30.7 rms.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

How is that possible when charging at 40amps and 125 volts from a 240 volt line? 40x125=5000 and 30x240=7200. Seems as if you shouldn't be drawing much more than 20 amps from the line, which is what Rich suggests.


----------



## azdeltawye (Dec 30, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Any chance I could talk you into cranking it up on your next charge to see what happens? Mine seems to cut back after about 15-30 minutes.


JRP3 -
I too have a PFC-30 and recently discovered similar thermal limitations: 
The conditions of my test were: line voltage = 236V and nominal battery voltage of 128V (40 ThunderSky 3.2V Lithium cells). The charger initially drew 23A from the line (current knob fully CW) but went into thermal limit and reduced the input draw to 19.2A after about 15 minutes and stayed that way for the duration of the CC charge cycle (approx 3 hours). The battery current started out at 37A but dropped off to 31A during thermal cut back mode. The ambient temperature was about 80 deg F and the unit is mounted in the trunk of the vehicle but the trunk lid was open. The air exiting the charger was warm but did not feel hot.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> How is that possible when charging at 40amps and 125 volts from a 240 volt line?


 Because 240VAC is voltage amplitude, and power is the product of rms current, rms voltage, and power factor.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

azdeltawye said:


> JRP3 -
> I too have a PFC-30 and recently discovered similar thermal limitations:
> The conditions of my test were: line voltage = 236V and nominal battery voltage of 128V (40 ThunderSky 3.2V Lithium cells). The charger initially drew 23A from the line (current knob fully CW) but went into thermal limit and reduced the input draw to 19.2A after about 15 minutes and stayed that way for the duration of the CC charge cycle (approx 3 hours). The battery current started out at 37A but dropped off to 31A during thermal cut back mode. The ambient temperature was about 80 deg F and the unit is mounted in the trunk of the vehicle but the trunk lid was open. The air exiting the charger was warm but did not feel hot.


Here's an explanation from Rich as to exactly what is happening:


> The reason why you see a long warm up before the cut back happens is the Thermal channel that really gets too hot is the Inductor. We have that channel set to 190 to 210 Deg F cut back. This 5 lbs hunk of iron power takes a while to heat up. The PFC30s and 40s use a -61 material that can be run at 200C. This also backs up the fact the only difference in a 40 is a LOT more fan power.
> 
> PFC40 will run will run at 44 amps in a 70 deg F room. For at least 2 hours. Water cooled PFC40s will run for over 10Kw hr at full power, with 90 Deg F water flow at 1/2 Gallons a minute.
> 
> ...


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> Because 240VAC is voltage amplitude, and power is the product of rms current, rms voltage, and power factor.


That doesn't seem right. 240 should be RMS voltage.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

I tried charging at 34ADC yesterday and it over-temp'ed in about 30 - 35 minutes. Readings from TBS (DC) and EKM (AC) were:

V I Pwr
DC 119.9 34.1 4089
AC 239.9 38.1 4375

Efficiency about 0.93. So if the AC are rms values the power factor is around 1/2.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Could the AC amps reading be non-RMS?


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> Could the AC amps reading be non-RMS?


 I don't know why it would report rms voltage and peak current. Plus, that would only give a factor of square root of 2.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

tomofreno said:


> I don't know why it would report rms voltage and peak current. Plus, that would only give a factor of square root of 2.


Likely what is happening is that it is making a peak current reading, and dividing the result by 1.414 (which would be correct if the current was a sine wave).

Interestingly, it seems to be getting the power about right, probably very close to right. It may be doing instantaneous voltage times instantaneous current and averaging the results over time. With instantaneous current samples, it would not be difficult to provide a true-RMS current reading (average the square of the instantaneous readings, and take the square root of the result), but they don't seem to bother. I guess all that floating point maths is a little hard for the tiny micro they may have in there.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Something weird is going on. I had another overvoltage shutdown today, it happened with about 10 miles on the pack and after going uphill for about 2 miles then going down a slight incline in second gear. I let off the accelerator to make a turn, regen came on then immediately shut down, yet while I was looking current wasn't much more than 120 amps, (I've done much higher), and the volts during regen were around 122, though I wasn't looking at the voltage at the exact time of the overvoltage. The 1311 shows capacitor voltage and keyswitch voltage, and the cap voltage holds until you cycle the controller. Cap voltage was showing 130 volts, which would be 3.61 per cell. I happened to have a cell log 8 on 7 of the cells at the time and none of them showed higher than 3.45, and I really doubt the rest of the pack with 10 miles of use got anywhere near high enough to make up the difference to drive the pack to 130. Previously I had that 140V overvoltage incident which makes even less sense at 3.89 per cell. Any ideas what could drive cap voltage artificially high and cause this shutdown?


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Something weird is going on. ... Any ideas what could drive cap voltage artificially high and cause this shutdown?


The only thing I can think of is a link or two going high resistance. You might attribute sag under load to battery internal resistance (sag due to the battery pack). But when there is resistance in the links or cables, under regen, you end up with controller capacitor voltage higher than the sum of the voltages of all the cells.

It could be worth going over the links and cables (especially at the cable ends) with a non contact IR thermometer to see if any of them are higher resistance than the others.

It's a little ironic that because of your low voltage headroom situation, you might detect HR links or cables more readily as an overvoltage event during regen than as an undervoltage event under heavy drive loads.

Keep us posted about what you find.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Very good possible diagnosis. Guess I finally have a good excuse to buy a new toy, I've always wanted an IR thermometer but could never really justify it


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

If you have a cell, or a few with high internal resistance due to damage, it's voltage will spike severely when subjected to a charge and sag significantly when it is under load. Another possibility is what coulomb said. ...or you could have a cell(or a few) out of balance, being too full. 120 amps into a few cells that are already topped off will cause their voltage to spike pretty hard. I'm hoping that it's a connection related issue.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

This morning I took a short trip downhill to work on a full charge. Highest voltage I saw on 140 amps of regen was 126.7. No way my voltage went higher yesterday doing the opposite of the same trip with 10 miles already on the pack. I put my hand on all the terminals, all battery terminal were cool to the touch, all motor and controller terminals felt about the same level of slight warmth. However since this was mostly down hill I doubt I ever pulled more than 300 amps if that, unlike the return trip yesterday which would have been extended times at 300-400 amps and could have heated up a poor connection more. I haven't found anything loose yet and still have to pick up an IR thermometer.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> This morning I took a short trip downhill to work on a full charge. Highest voltage I saw on 140 amps of regen was 126.7. No way my voltage went higher yesterday doing the opposite of the same trip with 10 miles already on the pack.


Err, it might. If you have a weak cell (let's hope not, but just suppose), then as it discharges and its IR increases it could get to a state where it can't take a 1.2C charge without going severely overvoltage.

Maybe there's nothing wrong with your cells, and 1.2C is just a bit too much charge current. I'd like to think it was fine, especially for short bursts like regen.

Maybe you could learn something from watching (with a multimeter) your cells during bulk charge. You probably charge at a fair bit less than 120 A, but things like cell voltage and link voltage drop might be scaleable (obviously, cell voltage won't scale linearly with charge current, but link and cable voltage drop will.)


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

Coulomb said:


> Err, it might. If you have a weak cell ... then as it discharges and its IR increases it could get to a state where it can't take a 1.2C charge without going severely overvoltage.


Actually, that's maybe lead acid thinking there. Flooded lead acid at that, where at lower SOCs (and 10 mi out isn't exactly a really low SOC) the acid can get a bit dilute, so that if you charge hard, you can get the battery voltage initially rising (due to the high IR of weak acid) and then falling as the SOC increases, the acid concentration increases, and the IR therefore decreases.

Thank goodness we don't have that sort of effect with Lithium. at least as far as I'm aware.

So we're back to: mystery?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Did another 20 mile trip out to my parent's, charged up there, did another 20 miles getting home, no problems. Many long up and down hill sections along the way, it's hard to find a flat surface around here. I'm sure as soon as I feel as if the problem has gone away it will come back. Sent an Email to HPEVS to see if they have any thoughts.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Any more recurrence of the over voltage? Sounds like you are having fun! Could you summarize what parameters you have changed using the 1311 and the effects?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

No more overvoltage issues, but I can't say it's solved since I never found a cause. I've moved a few things around a bit, isolated the circuit breaker and contactor from the mounting plate so they don't get the controller heat transfered to them, and rechecked all connections. I sent the jerky throttle back to Kelly and they are sending me a new one. Right now I'm back to the trigger throttle from the AMPhibian, which is very smooth and gives very precise feel using your fingers instead of your foot. Makes working the radio and climate controls difficult though.

Here are the parameters that I ended up with:

Accel Rate
Stock .5 sec
Now .1 sec

Accel Release Rate
Stock .5 sec
Now .1 sec

Neutral Braking
Stock 20%
Now 40%

Gear Soften
Stock 20%
Now 10%

Forward Map
Stock 35%
Now 60%

Forward Deadband
Now 1.00 (Had to bump it back up because of the throttle issues)

User Overvoltage (with nominal set at 96V)
Stock 140%
Now 133%

I think that's everything I changed, some of the stock numbers may be a bit off. All were attempts to give a more aggressive feel on acceleration and stronger regen, except for the throttle deadband. I'd like to drop that back down so I get a throttle response with less pedal travel but I'm not sure the Kelly can handle it. I may just add a stop to the pedal that preloads the pedal a bit.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

What is "gear soften"? I hadn't noticed that one. I dropped my accle_rate to 0.5 sec (was at 1.0 as received). You notice significant difference with 0.1? My accel_release rate was at 0.4 sec and I left it there. What effect did changing that have? My neutral_braking was at 10% as received, changed it to 50%. So I guess you don't find the throttle too touchy for regen with forward_map at 60%? I liked it at 60% for more responsive throttle, but put it back to 50% because I thought it might be too touchy to control regen.

Sent you a pm.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Gear soften is under the Fine Tuning section in Torque mode:


> Adjusts the throttle take-up from linear (0% setting) to an S curve.
> Larger values create softer throttle take-up, in forward and reverse.
> Softening is progressively reduced at higher speeds; see Figure 9.


All part of my attempt to get a stronger acceleration feel. Same with dropping Accel rate to 0.1, I wanted as little delay as possible when I mashed the pedal. I dropped release rate to match it as I was getting some rough response but looking back that was probably the bad pot.
I liked the more aggressive feel with forward map at 60% and don't think it makes regen too touchy. The Fiero is a sports car after all so I want it to feel a little rough, more of a "hair trigger" if you will. It was very smooth with the factory settings but it felt "weak".


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

> It was very smooth with the factory settings but it felt "weak".


 That's for sure. I thought there was something wrong when I first moved it out of the garage, as I pushed the pedal halfway down and the car barely moved. It performs well now after some initial tweeking so I've just been driving it. Maybe I'll play around a bit more with settings. Sounds like your second gear is just about right for most driving since you can go up to a bit over 60 mph. Second on the Swift is a bit over 7:1 so the Fiero must be around 6:1?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

According to this page it's 6.834:1 http://www.cowspatoot.com/utilities.html
85-88 Isuzu MT2, 6500 RPM and 23" tire seems to give similar results to what I'm seeing.
My 23" tire diameter may change it a bit compared to yours.

Never heard back from Bill at HPEVS on my overvoltage situation, maybe the Wheego situation has them maxed out. I'll try Brian next.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The over voltage gremlin is back  Weird thing is I've now had 3 shutdowns on the same section of road almost in the same spot, 2 in one direction 1 in the other. Fairly level section, mild regen, partially depleted pack. If I try to make it happen on a steeper section with more aggressive regen it won't happen, though my first 2 shutdowns happened this way. Brian is working on the problem but no solutions yet.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> The over voltage gremlin is back  Weird thing is I've now had 3 shutdowns on the same section of road almost in the same spot, 2 in one direction 1 in the other.


I don't suppose that there are any radio transmitters near that spot? Just wondering if it could be EMI confusing the electronics.

Though of course, it would take some strong EMI to overcome the noise of a typical EV. But I guess it could still happen.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah I was wondering if there was something going on in that area but it's just a residential area, houses set well back from the street. I'll look for a big antenna or something but it's probably just coincidence as I drive that road every day and let off the throttle in the same place. Maybe I'm tapping into Tesla's radiant energy


----------



## Bowser330 (Jun 15, 2008)

conduct some tests...Drive the same section of road with...

(1) a more depleted pack voltage.
(2) regen turned-off all together
(3) different throttle positions, to vary the V sag.

Just soem guesses really, good luck!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

(1) Done it, with more and less, doesn't seem to matter. Most of the time it doesn't happen.

(2) Can't really do that, don't have the programmer any more, but effectively I do the same thing just by keeping neutral throttle position. It only happens during regen, but not necessarily strong regen.

(3) See above.

Thanks for the suggestions though, I'm open to anything.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Two more controller shut down incidents, but I may be creeping up on an answer. First one was on the flat, slight deceleration coming to a corner, and I was actually watching the pack voltage as I let off and saw only 122 volts, and then the gauge said Code 18 which is over voltage shutdown. Obviously 122 volts is not over voltage. Looking at the code descriptions again I see this for Code 18:
1. Battery Menu parameters are misadjusted.
2. Battery resistance too high for given regen current.
3. Battery disconnected while regen braking.

Can't be 1 or 2, but, what if something else was causing the controller to disconnect while I'm regenning?
Which leads me to my second shutdown, this time with a Code 38, which is Main Contactor Welded. Except it's not. Reading the code descriptions for Code 38 I get this:
1. Main contactor tips are welded closed.
2. Motor phase U is disconnected or open.
3. An alternate voltage path (such as an external precharge resistor) is providing a current to the capacitor bank (B+ connection terminal).

My thinking is that the 840 only displays one fault code, probably the last one it gets. Maybe I'm having multiple faults with the Code 18 Severe Overvoltage being the last one that shows up, except in my most recent incident which showed Code 38. Maybe Code 38 has been causing the capacitor voltage to spike up and give me the Code 18. Further reading about code 38 says this:
Set: Just prior to the main contactor closing, the capacitor bank voltage (B+ connection terminal) was loaded for a short time and the voltage did not discharge.

That sounds like a startup condition, not what I'm experiencing. But maybe somehow I get an intermittent open circuit on Motor Phase U as in #2, or something is intermittently somehow spiking the capacitor bank as in #3.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I'm really reaching off the deep end here, but is it possible you have a voltage spike problem within the bus that is not being detected by the volt meter? I wonder if an oscilliscope might be able to give you some more info on what is happening.

Normally the controller should have some method of snubbing those spikes (snubber caps or laminated bus bars).


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It seems so completely random and infrequent that I'm not sure how I'd catch it with a scope. The only common denominator is that it only happens during regen. Doesn't matter how strong the regen is, or what the pack SOC or voltage is. Today with about 4 miles on the pack I put 190 amps of regen into it slowing down from 60 in second gear, no problems. I'd think if I had voltage spike issues that would have triggered them.
I keep thinking about #3 for Code 18, battery disconnected when regen braking. If that can drive capacitor voltage up, which is what I'm seeing, then another fault shutting down the controller could cause it. I'm wondering if an intermittent short to the frame from pack or motor wiring could trigger Code 38 from either #2 Motor Phase U disconnected or #3 An alternate voltage path (such as an external precharge resistor) is providing a current to the capacitor bank.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I keep thinking about #3 for Code 18, battery disconnected when regen braking.


Is it possible that a mechanical bump is causing the main contactor to open briefly? Maybe mounting the main contactor on rubber or the like could help.

I'm just thinking of all the contactors that we will have in our high voltage MX-5 conversion (about 10)... the chances of at least one of them bumping open could be high.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> It seems so completely random and infrequent that I'm not sure how I'd catch it with a scope.


I'd attempt some sort of LCD scope continuously measuring the voltage at the input of the controller, and some sort of push button that you can press when the even happens. This button would stop recording more data, so you hopefully get the last 10 seconds of voltage before the button push.

I have no idea if that's a standard capability; I don't own such a scope. I suppose it could be a simple micro with an analogue port and a suitable voltage divider, writing readings to a circular buffer in RAM. A push button would stop writing new data, and maybe dump the data to a file on a USB flash drive.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Coulomb said:


> Is it possible that a mechanical bump is causing the main contactor to open briefly? Maybe mounting the main contactor on rubber or the like could help.


Easy enough to try. It's mounted on a half inch plastic block on top of the controller mounting plate, which is in turn bolted to the motor and transmission, which are of course rubber mounted. Most of the incidents happened on what I would consider smooth roads, and I've certainly traveled over some pretty rough sections with no problems.


----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> ... which is in turn bolted to the motor and transmission, which are of course rubber mounted.


Mmm, sounds like it's not bumps from the road. However, when going from power to regen, the motor may have a bit of rotation, which I guess could affect the contactor. It's at a significant radius, so it could get a bit of "whip lash".

Granted, it's sounding unlikely.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Actually you might be onto something. The adapter plate is very close to a cross member at one spot, so close that sometimes on when slowing the adapter plate hits it as the motor rotates forward. It's possible that once in a while when this happens, maybe in conjunction with a road bump, it affects the contactor. I've been meaning to shave a section of the plate off but have been putting it off as it may entail pulling everything out to get to it. Maybe I can get to it from the bottom if I drop the belly pan.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Haven't had any more shutdown problems, but don't know why. Working on a 50+ mile range from my last charge, mixed driving including a short spurt to 70mph in third gear  I need to find an empty, flat stretch of road to see what it can do sometime.
Bad news is I think my second Kelly throttle is acting up like the first one, getting harder to achieve steady acceleration without jerkiness. Have yet to measure the output to confirm but I know the feeling. Not sure what I'll do, I don't feel like sending a throttle back every month for a replacement.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

50+ mile range with 11.52kwh of power? That's better than I thought you would be able to get, what were your original range goals? The Sky Energy cells seem to always have a little more capacity than what they rate them for, but if you get 50 miles off of 36 100Ah cells, you are better than 230wH/mile. That's good range territory to be in. I might consider going with 100Ah cells and save the cash when I end up converting. With an aero car and under 2000 pounds(Honda Insight or a Swift/Metro/Civic/CRX HF type tiny car) I figure I could probably do 60 miles until empty, although I wouldn't plan to run it below 70% regularly myself as I'd prefer to have extra to deal with some extra range in the case that I get a flukey situation where my batteries aren't giving me what they normally do.

Have you measured the amperage draw on the batteries or their voltage sag when accelerating to 70mph? I think that having the Sky Energy cells are the best option for your application. The specs on the 100Ah cells they ship today are 800amps for 10 seconds or less and everything I've seen shows them more capable than the Thunder Sky cells. If their spec indicates their true capabilities, I'd be plenty happy with the same size and have less headaches trying to get 180 or 200Ah cells in a small car.

Keep us up to date on the empty flat stretch of road.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

My original estimate was for a good 30 mile range, hoping to hit 35-40 under good conditions. However, the reality of these cells is they all tested to 110Ah or better, so really 12.67Kwh for the pack, about 250wh/mi. This was basically running on "fumes" for the last mile, 106 resting voltage, 2.94 per cell, after 51 miles. Probably 10 miles or so was around town, 30mph max, 10 miles was 45mph max, the rest was in and out of town between 45-65.
Amp draw and voltage sag depends on how hard I'm accelerating more than what speed I reach. I can pull 500 amps for a couple seconds getting to 30 if I hammer it or I can pull 200-300 all the way to 70 if I use reasonable acceleration. I rarely use more than 400 amps even when accelerating somewhat aggressively.


----------



## karlos (Jun 30, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> My original estimate was for a good 30 mile range, hoping to hit 35-40 under good conditions. However, the reality of these cells is they all tested to 110Ah or better, so really 12.67Kwh for the pack, about 250wh/mi. This was basically running on "fumes" for the last mile, 106 resting voltage, 2.94 per cell, after 51 miles. Probably 10 miles or so was around town, 30mph max, 10 miles was 45mph max, the rest was in and out of town between 45-65.
> Amp draw and voltage sag depends on how hard I'm accelerating more than what speed I reach. I can pull 500 amps for a couple seconds getting to 30 if I hammer it or I can pull 200-300 all the way to 70 if I use reasonable acceleration. I rarely use more than 400 amps even when accelerating somewhat aggressively.


I'm looking forward to seeing your results for a long run without much acceleration/deceleration as my ideal conversion will be good for 100miles.... There are some hills in this transit between the two cities I have in mind.
Good to see you are getting out there and getting some real miles in!


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Nice going on the range there. Don't know if you answered this already, but what is the car's empty weight after the coversion?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Haven't weighed it but it should be close to stock, around 2500-2700lbs.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

This turned out to be a really nice conversion J! Every time I poke my nose in here to see how things are going I remember how far you've come from when we first met on PFF; and how far battery technology seems to have come since our first conversations. Both very impressive!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Actually I'm a bit disappointed with the progress in the last year, at least for the TS/SE prismatics. There has been no change in the specs since I bought my cells a year ago, and since EVC is gone prices seem to have gone up, not down. I wonder if the basic TS/SE technology is topped out, or at a point of diminishing returns?


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

JRP3 said:


> Haven't weighed it but it should be close to stock, around 2500-2700lbs.


Very interesting. I wonder how my car will compare for Watts/mile since the weight is very close between the two.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Actually I'm a bit disappointed with the progress in the last year, at least for the TS/SE prismatics. There has been no change in the specs since I bought my cells a year ago, and since EVC is gone prices seem to have gone up, not down. I wonder if the basic TS/SE technology is topped out, or at a point of diminishing returns?


The SE specsheet seems better to me, I thought a year ago their 10C spec was in the tens of milliseconds range. Now their 40Ah is at 10C, 100 is at 8C I think. It's diminishing based on size of the cell due to heat issues and the total current limits of the foils, amongst other things. My internet is being a pain so I can't get the site to come up at the moment.

It seems to me that things look a little better, the changes aren't dramatic and the price drop that we originally saw with EVC is falling away. It seems however that this slump in progress and price drop hasn't hit other forms of lithium though, in the smaller size range of LiPo such as ~5Ah(coming in packs of up to 6 or 10 in series if you like) which is in the realm of those using the now less capable M1 A123 cells which are also relatively more expensive make me think of going that direction. It seems that due to some recent shipping issues from Hong Kong that they might be starting to expand US warehouse operations for those Hong Kong cells and my more near-term project could use about 25Ah. Cycle life is a big concern, price is competitive with LiFePO4 which was the only reason I originally considered this side of the pond(also larger Ah sizes too) and of course going below 2.8 volts or above 4.3 volts can be catastrophic, not using a BMS that at least shuts things off if a cell going outside the safe region, which really isn't too hard, is critical but battery technology is advancing and I'm sure it is for LiFePO4 too, we just might not be seeing it at the moment.

Have you seen the latest CALB specsheets from their site? en.calb.cn It seems that most distributors still have a fairly outdated sheet.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Looks to me as if they are just using different parameters, not necessarily actual improved performance. The size and weight are the same, they are simply listing 8C at less than 10 sec. now for max discharge instead of using 4C at less than 30 sec., and impulse 12C at 5ms. I see no real performance difference.
http://en.calb.cn/ProductInfoExhibi...5c&comp_stats=comp-FrontProduct_list-005.html
http://lithiumstorage.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=18


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

JRP3 said:


> Looks to me as if they are just using different parameters, not necessarily actual improved performance. The size and weight are the same, they are simply listing 8C at less than 10 sec. now for max discharge instead of using 4C at less than 30 sec., and impulse 12C at 5ms. I see no real performance difference.
> http://en.calb.cn/ProductInfoExhibi...5c&comp_stats=comp-FrontProduct_list-005.html
> http://lithiumstorage.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=18


Yup, I noticed a year ago claims of 10C for 7.5 seconds and got a chuckle out of that because the spec sheet that came with mine states 5C for 15 seconds. Basically the same rating.


----------



## electric85 (Apr 10, 2008)

just wanted to say that I have finally been back in the shop working on my fiero and although i'm not at the ev stage of my conversion/restoration, i have found this thread very helpful for my planning process!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Glad you found some useful info. Good luck with the build.


----------



## Fiero_GT-EV (Jul 4, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Glad you found some useful info. Good luck with the build.


JRP,

Are you using your stock dash tach and if so, how are you driving it?

Thanks


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

No the Curtis 840 display gives RPM's so I didn't bother to pursue driving the stock tach. I don't usually look at RPM's anyway since I mostly drive in 2nd gear from 0-65mph and the motor is electronically limited to 6500RPM.


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

According to HPEVS, the new firmware for the AC controllers includes a gauge output. It can be set to display RPM of the motor, or for fixed gear, MPH. It'l drive the Tach if you want it to.


----------



## Fiero_GT-EV (Jul 4, 2009)

frodus said:


> According to HPEVS, the new firmware for the AC controllers includes a gauge output. It can be set to display RPM of the motor, or for fixed gear, MPH. It'l drive the Tach if you want it to.


My controller is jsut a few months old. Do I have this firmware that you speak of?

Thanks


----------



## frodus (Apr 12, 2008)

I'm not sure if it's released or if it's coming out soon.

Do you have a programmer to check the code revision in the controler?


----------



## Fiero_GT-EV (Jul 4, 2009)

frodus said:


> I'm not sure if it's released or if it's coming out soon.
> 
> Do you have a programmer to check the code revision in the controler?


Yes I do, but the car is not built yet. It will be a few weeks before I can check the code revision.

Thanks for the feedback gents.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Apparently sitting on the shelf for a few months out of the car has killed my Chennic DC/DC converter  Hooked it back up, nothing. Took the cover off to see what I could see, and it's completely potted in a solid brick of epoxy or something. Not sure if that's a great feature, sure it's water proof, but I'd think the coating limits it's cooling ability. Anyway, I need a replacement, any ideas? Iota won't work for me since my pack voltage is too low at 115 nominal. I do have a small ProTech charger I might try, don't know if it will work on DC, or even if it does if it will put out enough at my pack voltage.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Apparently sitting on the shelf for a few months out of the car has killed my Chennic DC/DC converter
> ...
> Anyway, I need a replacement, any ideas?..


I've had good luck with "MEANWELL" power supplies. We use a bank of 25 of them to keep our dyno pack charged up (which is an extremely abusive job). All of the ones with "universal input" and/or PFC should work fine on DC, though you might be stressing the input bridge rectifier (probably not enough to matter, though, unless you run them at the ragged edge of their power output).

There are people on eBay selling them for less, but I buy them from Jameco because it's no hassle and fast. Sometimes getting something a week quicker is worth $10, you know... Anyway, here's a 15V/40A w/ PFC switcher that costs $150. Oh, these aren't hardened for vehicle use, but then again, neither are the Iotas...


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Apparently neither are the Chennics, or maybe I should say they aren't "shelf" hardened since it worked fine while in the vehicle initially. I suppose it could have failed on my last drive before I pulled it and I just didn't notice. 
The MEANWELL's look good, I was going to PM you and see if EVnetics might be working on a DC/DC solution but I guess not.
Had another thought, I've really wanted a DC pack to 110AC inverter and was thinking if I bit the bullet and got the Blue Flash inverter I'd have my AC inverter plus I could plug one of my 12V chargers into that to support my 12V system. Certainly efficiency would not be great on the 12V side but my 12V loads are small, and I could run my heater on 110AC, as well as an A/C unit eventually. Inverter at 95% x charger at 95% = 90% 12V system efficiency? Although looking at the MEANWELL it only shows 85% efficiency, so if other products are similar 85%x 85% = 72% which is not great.
Maybe I'll just see if that ProTech charger will work on DC. What should I watch for, other than smoke?   I have a 20 amp and a 30 amp to work with
http://www.pmariner.com/productFeature.php?ProductNum=61220
http://www.pmariner.com/productFeature.php?ProductNum=61230


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> ... I was going to PM you and see if EVnetics might be working on a DC/DC solution but I guess not.


Well, a dc/dc converter is a relatively inexpensive product so it's not an ideal choice for a small "boutique" manufacturer to produce. That said, I have been wanting to tinker with a weird topology for awhile now and this would be a perfect application for it - it can handle a wide voltage range, is isolated, and is naturally protected against overloads - perfect for being abused by DIYers, in other words... 

My tinkering would be pursuant to another pursuit, so it will be awhile before anything might show up for sale at Evnetics (if ever). There is a rather gaping void in the market, but I do wonder if anyone would be willing to pay a premium price for an Evnetics dc/dc converter... I really can't compete with the Chennics and Kellys of the world on price.



JRP3 said:


> Had another thought, I've really wanted a DC pack to 110AC inverter and was thinking if I bit the bullet and got the Blue Flash inverter I'd have my AC inverter plus I could plug one of my 12V chargers into that to support my 12V system.


This is what engineers call a kludge... A solution that might work, but it's clunky and inelegant. And yes, efficiency of this combo would suck, but given the power level relative to what the controller handles, or even the charger, it's probably not worth worrying about.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Just heard from a guy on the EVDL who used to work for Protech who actually tried using them as a DC/DC and they fried. He didn't see why they wouldn't work but never dug into why they failed. In any case I won't bother with that plan. The Meanwell looks like the best deal I've seen so far, if I don't go the kludge route


----------



## gsmith191145 (May 1, 2011)

```
[QUOTE="Lordwacky, post: 166163, member: 5178"]No BMS?   Just curious because my I'm starting to think my Elithion is a $2k POS that isn't worth the silicon it was made out of...[/QUOTE]
```
Yes what about BMS?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I am the BMS, none shall rule my pack but me!


----------



## gsmith191145 (May 1, 2011)

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them


----------



## EVfun (Mar 14, 2010)

JRP3 said:


> Apparently sitting on the shelf for a few months out of the car has killed my Chennic DC/DC converter  Hooked it back up, nothing.


Which DC to DC converter? I see several on the web site. 

I am currently using a Kelly Controls DC to DC converter. After dropping my system voltage I could no longer use my Todd PC20-LV DC to DC converter. So far I have not had any problems but I've been using the Kelly HWZ 96 volt converter less than a year.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The 400 watt version
http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forum...-brand-newisolated-dc-dc-converter-39567.html


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Got the Meanwell, went the Ebay route and got it in three days. Nice and compact, but I didn't consider the fan, I might need to add some sort of filter over the air intakes so it doesn't pull in dust and moisture since it's mounted in the motor bay.
Not sure how I should set it, right now it's hooked up to a small AGM battery and it's set where it seems to cycle between 12.86V and 12.78V. As I turn it higher it runs longer of course, putting out about 1.3 amps to the battery with no system load. The Chennic I just wired always on but with the fan constantly cycling on the Meanwell I should probably switch it, and just wire my EV Display direct to the 12V battery. Or would I be better off skipping the 12V battery completely and leaving it always on? I doubt the fan would run with just the EV Display load.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Tried it wired direct without the battery, even with only phantom loads the fan runs. Tess, ever open up one of the Meanwells? I was just wondering how hard it might be to wire the fan to a thermal switch, or switch it with the ignition. I can't imagine it really needs a fan at 1 amp or so.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

For now I'm shutting off the power to the Meanwell, and the line out of the Meanwell to the battery. When powered off the Meanwell seems to drain the battery somewhat. I guess I'll need to switch both with the key switch, not a problem, other than the 12V battery won't be charging when the car is charging, and the 12V battery phantom loads won't be supported by the pack when the car is off. At some point I'll open up the Meanwell and see about switching the fan on and off.

Figured I'd post some of my other changes to the car. Moved the two 12 cell banks out of my trunk and into the engine bay. Really tight fit, had to grind a notch in the transmission bell housing, but they're in there.










Added a 7 inch Procomp radiator fan to the bottom of the controller heatsink, switched with the key for now, I'll probably switch it with a thermostat so it doesn't run all the time but can still cool the controller when the car is off.

















Before I blew the output to the dislpay it looked as if it was keeping temps lower.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

In my continuing battle with throttles I may have finally fixed it. I was gong to switch to a hall effect but since I blew the com port I can't change settings. So I searched endlessly for a better pot than the Hoss that came with my Kelly pedal, found a Vishay that was pretty close, but not quite the same. The shaft was a little shorter, and a little larger diameter. Found a local machine guy and had him turn down the end of the shaft, flat it, and drill and thread a hole into the end. This allowed me to fit the small gear that interfaces with the gear in the pedal. It's a 0-20K 360 degree rotation pot, which I thought would be a good replacement for the 0-5K. However it seems the 0-5K pot uses more than 90 degrees of rotation and the new 0-20K pot is 360 degree mechanical but 340 degree electrical. It works but if I push the pedal too far it cuts out because it's beyond the 5k max. I'll add a physical stop to the pedal but I probably should have gotten a 0-10K pot instead, since full pedal travel on the 20K pot gives me 10K.  So far it's very smooth, I think it's rated at 5 million cycles, so hopefully it will last.
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=SP157P-20K-ND
Here's the 10K unit I probably should have gotten.
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=SP157P-10K-ND


----------



## CFreeman54 (Jan 14, 2009)

JRP3: Congrats on the 12 batteries in front of the motor. You positioned them similarly to what I did but found a way to avoid rotating the battery in front of the transmission/motor plate 90° as I did. How big of a notch did you have to cut off the plate? If I end up replacing my engine bay batteries someday I may try this; it is more tidy than my solution.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Just to be clear the picture shows the lower 12 which fit without notching. I had to lower them about half an inch below the rear frame. Because of the angle of the firewall the upper 12 were closer to the transaxle, and the rack was hitting the adapter plate and bellhousing. I think I notched out about 1/2 - 3/4 of an inch. It would be just behind where the blue wire loom is hanging in this picture.


----------



## CFreeman54 (Jan 14, 2009)

Yup, the problem area is the same...except I think you have a tad more space than I do. The trans/motor plate for my Warp 11 wouldn't let me fit batteries in that low spot without cutting plate or rotating batteries. If my memory is correct, about a 1/2 or 3/4" notch would have created sufficient space. I think I may have a bolt/nut right where I need to notch though...I see you have one in the exact spot I had trouble.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah I had enough room to go above the bolt without interfering with the hood. My hood has a slight bulge there, don't know if they all do.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Actually it had nothing to do with the hood itself, the cells end up just under the hood hinge mounting points on the firewall, with maybe half an inch of clearance.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Totaling up my costs in the throttle, I paid about $125 with shipping for the original unit, about $25 to ship the first one back after it failed, $23 for the new Vishay pot, for a grand total of $173 since I got the machine work for free. That would have added another $50. Not to mention all the hours spent looking for the right replacement pot. Good thing I didn't spend the $160 on the EVnetics throttle in the first place because I really wanted a foot pedal and didn't want to spend that much on a throttle


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

JRP3, How much noise does the fan make? It is about 500 cfm, correct? Know how much current it draws? Where did you get it? Cost? Thinking it would be a good replacement for my little 5" 260 cfm.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Noise isn't too bad, don't notice it when driving, I can hear it a little when stopped with the window open and the stereo off. 4.8 amps, 500 CFM, seems well built and smooth. Fan blade removable to reverse flow. Also seems to be out of stock at Amazon where I got it:
http://www.amazon.com/PROCOMP-ELECTRIC-COOLING-CURVED-BLADE/dp/B0043VYQVQ/ref=pd_rhf_p_t_1


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Had another adventure in Deep DOD land yesterday, actually had to push the car a few hundred feet   I knew the pack was low and I knew the SOC gauge was off a bit since I've been undercharging the pack but thought I could make it the three miles home from work, which is almost all uphill. Didn't happen. A little over half a mile from home the car was slowing way down and I knew I wouldn't make it so I turned around for the mostly downhill trip back to work. Unfortunately there was a slight uphill section that I couldn't quite make so I jumped out and kept the car moving with foot power for a few hundred feet to get over the hump  After that the downhill allowed me enough regen to get past the flat spots and make it back to work. I checked all the cells and they were between 2.70 and 2.75 and rising. I didn't want to wait for a charge so I took the work truck home and let the car sit overnight to see what the true resting voltage would be. This morning they were between 2.848 and 2.888 in a 64F garage. Now charging at 10 amps, I'll go back in about 8 hours and watch the final charge to check for capacity and any odd behavior. I've always had one outlier cell that came from a different batch, that's the one that was the lowest at 2.70 and 2.848. I never had data from the factory on it but it seems to be slightly higher resistance and slightly lower capacity than the rest of the pack, not enough to change it out but enough to notice the difference. My plan has been to wait for the higher voltage controller from Curtis and when I order more cells for that I'll get one extra, assuming calibpower can give me data for cells that will match the rest of my pack.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

In other news I've gotten some pictures and info on taking the controller apart and possibly fixing my blown communications port, once I take the car off the road for the winter. Seems as if you just unscrew the large brass rings around the terminals to take the cover off. Pics of the inside:


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

I think you just like to add a little adventure to your life. 
Btw, you are doing this backwards...you are supposed to ride your bicycle the 3 miles to work during summer and drive the ev in winter.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

While you are in there, how are the high power mosfets cooled? How is heat transfer to the controller aluminum bottom plate implemented?

I thought it was great that the spanish-speaker helped you out on trouble shooting of the controller and you were able to communicate with him through Google Translate! Hope the failure in yours is the same as his.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> I think you just like to add a little adventure to your life.


Yeah, it used to be high speed cars, motorcycles, and getting my truck stuck in the woods miles from home, now it's driving an EV until I have to push it 


> Btw, you are doing this backwards...you are supposed to ride your bicycle the 3 miles to work during summer and drive the ev in winter.


If it weren't for these darn hills I might, but three miles up steep hills after a day of work just isn't fun.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> I thought it was great that the spanish-speaker helped you out on trouble shooting of the controller and you were able to communicate with him through Google Translate! Hope the failure in yours is the same as his.


Yes I was as tickled with the technology that allowed me to communicate with him as I was getting the data. 
I'll take more detailed pics when I take mine apart.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Checked on the charging after around 8 hours, for some reason the current had dropped from 10 amps to 8.85 amps, so I turned it back up to 10.5 amps and it held that for the rest of the time until I dialed it back near the end. After around 10.5 hours charging around 10 amps my cells were still charging and between 3.38 and 3.40 volts, except for that one oddball. It was showing 3.47V, and since it started at a lower voltage, (I did not re balance at the bottom), it definitely has lost a bit of capacity, and it always was the smallest to begin with. I dropped the current down to 5 amps and it went to 3.44V while the others went to 3.37-3.39. I got tired of watching the batteries charge so stopped the charging there.
Since it's so far out of line with the rest of the pack I'll probably end up bleeding off some charge to top balance it closer to the rest of the pack. I can't count on the charger shutting off with it bottom balanced. If I rebalanced it at the bottom it would get even worse during charging. I won't be driving it much more this year so I should be able to avoid any more deep DOD events for a while


----------



## GizmoEV (Nov 28, 2009)

Do you have a half pack balance meter installed? If so, did it show a pack imbalance?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I do not. Haven't gotten around to it  I imagine the weaker cell would have sagged enough under load and being slightly out of balance that it would have shown up.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

The higher voltage of that particular cell at the end of charge might still be in the safe range at the end of charge. HiPower still recommends 3.85v for LiFePO4, ThunderSky is at 3.8v now, and the higher voltage of that one cell will allow you to be absolutely sure that particular cell is completely charged too. Have you checked to see how far it has reached during its peak yet? I'd imagine you aren't going to need to bleed off much at all. Keep in mind that if you run another deep discharge of the pack this cell might require removal when it might otherwise survive. Eventually you might end up pulling it from this pack if its capacity becomes low enough to where pulling it from the pack allows the pack to have a higher Ah count in total but that might take some time since you have less larger capacity cells rather than many smaller capacity cells, even though I can't really say a 100Ah is a larger capacity cell since its pretty average but with a cell count in the 30's each cell counts for quite a bit. You'd get a nice range boost if/when Curtis releases the higher voltage controller. Your torquier motor would love it too.

How did you end up at the deep discharge situation anyway? It sounds like you were coming home from work, did you not charge the night before or run a bunch of errands along the way?


----------



## GizmoEV (Nov 28, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I do not. Haven't gotten around to it  I imagine the weaker cell would have sagged enough under load and being slightly out of balance that it would have shown up.


I'm trying to determine what is a safe pack imbalance range. The most I've seen on my 20 cell pack is 0.14V different and was wondering what yours would have looked like.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

MN Driver said:


> The higher voltage of that particular cell at the end of charge might still be in the safe range at the end of charge. HiPower still recommends 3.85v for LiFePO4, ThunderSky is at 3.8v now, and the higher voltage of that one cell will allow you to be absolutely sure that particular cell is completely charged too. Have you checked to see how far it has reached during its peak yet?


CALB recommends 3.6 max voltage. Today I put another 5 amp hours into the pack at 10 amps which took that cell to 3.6V while all the others were between 3.39 and 3.42, and the charger still didn't shut off. If I don't bleed off some charge from that cell I'll have to lower the charging end voltage. I'll see what happens after a few more cycles.


> How did you end up at the deep discharge situation anyway? It sounds like you were coming home from work, did you not charge the night before or run a bunch of errands along the way?


I was actually trying to go for a deep DOD to see how well the pack was still bottom balanced, I just pushed it a little too far


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Interesting stuff. Today I put in another 2 amp hours at 10 amps, lo and behold the weak cell was more inline with the others, only going to 3.46V before the charger shut off. Other cells were between 3.40 and 3.44. Pulled a little charge out of the pack and put back in another amp hour and again the charger timed out and the weak cell only went to 3.46. I'll have to do some deeper cycling and see what happens but I have noticed something similar in the past, i.e. a bit of self top balancing. Possible explanation, by charging the weak cell to 3.6V it's not charging as efficiently as the other cells at lower SOC which are actually taking more of the charge as usable capacity. In any case it looks as if I may not need to do anything and just continue charging as I have been, and avoiding deep DOD's as I should have been


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

Don't forget that you'll get a higher voltage when pushing more current into cells versus less current to the same cell. So its possible that you'll have a higher voltage cell actually drop voltage while the current tapers down before it finishes charging. The total pack voltage will level off as the total voltage goes up with the cells at a lower SOC going up while the higher SOC cell at a higher voltage drops down a little because of the reduction in current. SOC differences and temperature which are related in how they affect internal resistance is what makes that possible.

Did you happen to catch the current that you were pulling at the first instance, was it 10 amps too? You'd have to be measuring at the same current level, similar SOC and temperature to make a proper comparison. Either way you cut it, it sounds like that one cell is healthier in relation to the rest of the pack than you anticipated. The higher voltage of that one cell will cause the total pack voltage to be slightly higher reducing the current at the end of the charge too, something to consider as it can slightly regulate things. I don't think there really is any self-balancing, I think its just different scenarios when voltages are being measured. Often I see people comparing voltages off the charge which they are going to be right next to each other anyway and the differences are only really obvious when pushing the heaviest of current, usually right around when CC goes to CV where the most current is being pushed and the total pack voltage is at the highest, of course things still move around until the charge is done so you'd have to pick a certain amperage level and stick with it when monitoring for differences. ...then again temperatures should be similar and charging warms the cells so that is a factor in the voltage of a particular cell too.

"I was actually trying to go for a deep DOD to see how well the pack was still bottom balanced, I just pushed it a little too far." I'd say that with the VPC that corresponds to the controllers low voltage cutback setting that if you bled current beforehand you would have been just a bit beyond 'a little too far' for the weakling in the pack. I would say that for the pack as a whole to be running it down to where your controller cut back enough to not want to climb a grade that you've gone very far. I'm speculating that voltage sag is one of the first damage signs for LiFePO4, after talking to ThunderSky before the whole Winston/Sinopoly split and CALB it seems that this could be an issue for those of us who decide to go with smaller pack sizes once they age or get abused. ThunderSky displays it in their 0.5C cycling charts, that 8000 cycle part of the graph makes them look unsuitable for an EV even though I'd probably be fine with the range. Careful with those cells, I'd hate to see them grow weak from deep discharges. There is a guy on the UK BVS forum that used a different chemistry of Thunder Sky bought in the mid 2000's that worked well for 7 years and still had the capacity but the voltage sag eventually lead him to sell the vehicle, he thinks it was a calendar life issue but then again it was a different chemistry and might not apply at all. He's now using LiFePO4 from multiple brands in different setups.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I was only doing constant current charging at 10 amps each time, so your theory doesn't fit. I've been doing constant current only this year to keep the cells under charged. If I want more capacity I'll restart the charger at a lower current.
CALB's seem to be stiffer than TS, and 2.70 resting voltage and climbing is not even fully discharged, CALB shows them under load to 2 volts.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

Curious question: Did you feel any of the terminals when you were at a deep DOD, I'm wondering if the cells got warm/hot when you were discharging them while they are low SOC. Seeing the big spike in temperature below 70% DOD on Jack's testing towards the end on his 4C discharge when he vented them is a big part of why I'll be as gentle with mine as I can be when they are drained. The problem with Jack's test is that he was measuring the plastic which is going to insulate the cell a little bit so in reality they were hotter inside, the terminals would have been a better way top measure but either way his got hot on the way down. I realize you aren't pulling 4C though. Since heat is a large part of cycle life if they stayed cool, it might not be as big of a deal as long as yours were still relatively cool. My aim is to never exceed 140f because FMAs testing of A123 cell cycle life was showing that this was the limit before they saw cycle life plummet.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yes I did feel the terminals when I got back to the shop, nothing warmer than usual. Remember my controller was limiting current quite a bit before it stopped, so as voltage dropped so to did the current, all the way to zero.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

A new adventure, my car will now only go into 1st or neutral  For a change today I used first out of the driveway and down to the first stop sigh. Went to shift it at the stop sign and the shifter would barely move. Continued to work in 1st gear and then pulled the cables off the transmission, hoping they might be the problem. No deal. I can't move either lever on the transmission more than a slight amount, just enough to barely get into neutral. I guess something broke or jammed inside. So I can either use the controller for electronic reverse, get some really big back tires to get my top speed in 1st up to at least 55 and drive it as is,  or I have some work to do


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Strange. Sorry to hear it. Did you ever get your controller communications fixed?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

That sucks.  The first thing I thought was the cables too, as Fiero shift cables do go bad, but it had to be inside the transmission, huh? Good luck getting her fixed and back in action.

The huge rear tires idea does have its own appeal.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

tomofreno said:


> Did you ever get your controller communications fixed?


No, was going to wait till this winter when I'm not driving it, though I'm still thinking about getting the 650 amp controller. I guess with this latest problem I might get the controller fixed now since I'll be off the road for a while.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> The huge rear tires idea does have its own appeal.


29 or 30 inch diameter should do it  I might have to see if I have something mounted lying around that would bolt up, just for fun.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Just found a rebuilt Getrag nearby for $600, which is a stronger transmission than the Isuzu anyway. I assume the axle shafts and input spline will match up, though I guess I'd need different shift cables. Might check it out, even though I only paid $800 for my whole car so it just seems wrong to pay almost that much for a transmission and cables.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Sorry to hear about your transmission.

Is there any reason to believe your current transmission is a write off?

I'm not familiar with Fieros, but of the transmissions I've taken apart they will generally make some noise, vibration or other obvious signs if there is a catastrophic internal failure.

You might just have a minor issue with the shift linkage. If nothing else, it would cost you nothing to pop the drain plug and drain a quart into a clean container to see if there are any large metal chunks or filings in there. If not, you may be able to repair it.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Just found a rebuilt Getrag nearby for $600, which is a stronger transmission than the Isuzu anyway. I assume the axle shafts and input spline will match up, though I guess I'd need different shift cables. Might check it out, even though I only paid $800 for my whole car so it just seems wrong to pay almost that much for a transmission and cables.


Do you have a Muncie or an Isuzu? The Muncie is the strongest. How much torque does your AC31 have? Most of the V8 swap guys tend to baby Getrags a bit, and an ICE has to ramp up the torque; the ones that like to play more find Muncies.

I agree with David about doing some free investigating, before you pull it and start spending money.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

david85 said:


> Is there any reason to believe your current transmission is a write off?


Not necessarily, but the Isuzu 5 speed is known for a weak second gear, which is what I use 99.99% of the time, and the Getrag is known to be stronger, so if I have to pull it out anyway I figure I might as well put in a better transmission.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Do you have a Muncie or an Isuzu? The Muncie is the strongest. How much torque does your AC31 have? Most of the V8 swap guys tend to baby Getrags a bit, and an ICE has to ramp up the torque; the ones that like to play more find Muncies.


I have the Isuzu, which a Pennocks search shows to have a weak 2nd gear, and most posts seem to say the Getrag is much stronger. I would like a Muncie but they seem to be rare, at least around here.
My motor is only around 110ft.lb torque, but my occasional clutchless speed shifts probably put some extra stress on the system, especially when I miss a shift  Also the previous owner did some sort of racing with the car, I picked it up cheap because of a burnt clutch, and it has really stiff springs in it, and in just the right light you can see the outline of numbers on the doors, I assume from stickers that were removed.


----------



## RE Farmer (Aug 8, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> A new adventure, my car will now only go into 1st or neutral  For a change today I used first out of the driveway and down to the first stop sigh. Went to shift it at the stop sign and the shifter would barely move. Continued to work in 1st gear and then pulled the cables off the transmission, hoping they might be the problem. No deal. I can't move either lever on the transmission more than a slight amount, just enough to barely get into neutral. I guess something broke or jammed inside. ... I have some work to do


FWIW, I don't know your particular tranny, but in my MG there are ball bearings that drop into a detent to prevent another shift rod from selecting another gear while the present one is engaged. If gunk is preventing the ball from clearing the detent a rebuild may be in order. A rebuild isn't particularly difficult - just watch out for springs and steel balls that shoot across the room during disassembly (disassemble those parts inside a 2Gal plastic bag).


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Anyone know if a manual from a 1984 Pontiac 2000 is a Muncie? I might have a line on one. I suppose I'd need a different shifter and cables as well?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I have the Isuzu, which a Pennocks search shows to have a weak 2nd gear, and most posts seem to say the Getrag is much stronger. I would like a Muncie but they seem to be rare, at least around here.
> My motor is only around 110ft.lb torque, but my occasional clutchless speed shifts probably put some extra stress on the system, especially when I miss a shift  Also the previous owner did some sort of racing with the car, I picked it up cheap because of a burnt clutch, and it has really stiff springs in it, and in just the right light you can see the outline of numbers on the doors, I assume from stickers that were removed.


Gotcha. 110ft-lb isn't too bad. I was thinking that if it was around 200, with the fast hit of an electric motor it might be pushing the trans to its limit. Of course, your driving habits aren't exactly helping matters...  




JRP3 said:


> Anyone know if a manual from a 1984 Pontiac 2000 is a Muncie? I might have a line on one. I suppose I'd need a different shifter and cables as well?


I think there's some difference, but I don't remember whether it's a minor issue or not. That was discussed on Pennock's because the search for transmissions is ongoing and often a critical need. YOu might find it with a search. Probably just search for info on using a FWD trans.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It looks as if the Getrag has one shifter cable that runs under the transmission and one that goes over the top, where both of mine are over the top. This could be a problem since I think my two forward battery banks would prevent me from running the lower cable.
Tranny ID thread for reference: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/063783.html


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> It looks as if the Getrag has one shifter cable that runs under the transmission and one that goes over the top, where both of mine are over the top. This could be a problem since I think my two forward battery banks would prevent me from running the lower cable.
> Tranny ID thread for reference: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/063783.html


That thread looks like exactly what you needed (information) - what did you decide to do?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Still not sure. It sort of depends on what I find at what price. If I find a parts car I could get a few other items I need, like a windshield without wiper marks, plus cables and a shifter if it has the Muncie 4 speed. So I'm kind of leaning in that direction right now. Of course if I stumble upon a GT at the right price....  I did find a nice 87GT for a good price in nicer shape than mine, but do I really want to do another ground up conversion on a Fiero? Do I want to try and swap the 88 suspension into it? Decisions decisions...


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Still not sure. It sort of depends on what I find at what price. If I find a parts car I could get a few other items I need, like a windshield without wiper marks, plus cables and a shifter if it has the Muncie 4 speed. So I'm kind of leaning in that direction right now. Of course if I stumble upon a GT at the right price....  I did find a nice 87GT for a good price in nicer shape than mine, but do I really want to do another ground up conversion on a Fiero? Do I want to try and swap the 88 suspension into it? Decisions decisions...


This busted transmission sounds like a snowball waiting to happen, to me. Is this your way of dealing with the heatwave?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Unfortunately it's more likely to make me sweat even worse 
My Fiero was an $800 car after all, so it really needs a paint job, which I have no interest in doing myself, and the windshield I mentioned. I also don't like the stiff suspension the previous owner installed, it might be great on a track but it sucks on most of the roads around here. Plus I'd rather have a GT. But, I'd also like a small 4x4 pickup truck I could drive year round, and I've always wondered what sort of efficiency a Prius converted to full EV would get, and how about a.....  Ahhh, this transmission has opened a can of worms!


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

Converting a Prius to an EV would be a difficult challenge considering you don't have a standard transmission to work with but there are plenty of people with the 2nd Gen going with the system that tricks the car into thinking its fully charged and keeping the gas engine stopped but once you hit the highway the engine has to turn or the electric motors would spin too fast so their solution is to turn the engine without putting gas in it which is adds an extreme inefficiency because you are basically running an air compressor under the hood which eats lots of power.

IMHO, the best bet would be to convert a different car than the Prius. The Toyota Echo is either a shared platform or very similar platform to the 1st Gen Prius but IMHO there are more efficient bodies to convert. My conversion will be a 2000 Honda Insight, can't get a more efficient body than that and the electric power steering and space for at least a portion of your battery is included where the stock battery, power inverter, and air cooling ductwork(takes up lots of space) are included. ..as long as you can live with a 2-seater that will never have rust, it's a great candidate. The pickup would use a considerable amount of power fighting aero drag. I'm not sure how deep your snow is but in my area if you want AWD then converting one of the lighter trims of a mid-90's Subaru Impreza is the lightest AWD vehicle and its aerodynamics aren't too big of a compromise but crash safety might be. If you really need to get off the ground to clear the snow, yeah you might need a pickup.

Sorry if it bothers you that I dumped out your can of worms on the kitchen counter.


----------



## dladd (Jun 1, 2011)

Don't over complicate things! Fix the transmission and get driving again.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

MN Driver said:


> Converting a Prius to an EV would be a difficult challenge considering you don't have a standard transmission to work with....


I'd gut the whole system and use a trans axle from another vehicle. 



> IMHO, the best bet would be to convert a different car than the Prius. The Toyota Echo is either a shared platform or very similar platform to the 1st Gen Prius but IMHO there are more efficient bodies to convert.


I'd do a gen 2 Prius, I think it's a better vehicle, and it would provide a direct comparison to the most popular hybrid. Insight is nice, but if I'm doing a 2 seater I want a sports car.


> The pickup would use a considerable amount of power fighting aero drag. I'm not sure how deep your snow is but in my area if you want AWD then converting one of the lighter trims of a mid-90's Subaru Impreza is the lightest AWD vehicle and its aerodynamics aren't too big of a compromise but crash safety might be. If you really need to get off the ground to clear the snow, yeah you might need a pickup.


Plus I can actually use the pickup bed and off road capabilities.


> Sorry if it bothers you that I dumped out your can of worms on the kitchen counter.


Not at all, I need to sort through them anyway 



dladd said:


> Don't over complicate things! Fix the transmission and get driving again.


The voice of reason. Yes that's a possibility, but boring, and if I have to take everything apart anyway....


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

There's a big difference between starting over in a new car and just pulling the motor and transmission to swap the transmission. ..battery boxes, figuring out the nuances of moving everything to the new car, adapting the motor to the new car. The costs and extra effort make sense if you are unsatisfied with the current car or there is are more issues with the current one but replacing the transmission would be cheaper, easier, and faster than what it costs for most people(time and money) to buy an adapter plate, rework the battery boxes, and get everything going in a completely new setup. It's a little different if you fab up your own adapter plate and the battery but time is still a factor in that case and the new car may have its share of challenges. If I liked the car, the Fiero is a nice car, and wanted to stick with it I'd replace the transmission because the cost of the transmission would be cheaper than the extra time and money to swap everything to a new car. If I wanted a new project to have a new project, or I was really after a different car for the utility or because I'd rather have a different one, I'd convert a different one. My 2 cents. It's all up to you, the ball is in your court.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

After talking to Roger White with the dual motor Fiero he says he's broken second gear in his Isuzu transmission twice, so repairing the one I have doesn't seem like it's worth it. I might have a line on a cheap donor car with an auto trans, so I'm considering giving that a shot.
I'm thinking of running it direct without the TC. The Fieros came with the TH125C transmission:
http://myfiero.oceanmoon.com/how-to/transmissions/the-ever-popular-th125
http://www.gearheadtrans.com/techinfo/gm_th125_tech.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_Fiero#Automatics
I'm looking at one of the earlier ones so I'd have the 3.18 drive ratio, which would give me 9.03 in first and 5.09 in second, compared to my current 12.50 and 6.83.
I don't know much about these transmissions or how they behave, I'd have to figure out how much pressure they need from an external pump and where to plumb it in. I'd probably want to manual shift it since the auto shift points probably won't be right for my AC31 motor, and I doubt I'd want to use third gear at all. I assume it could handle the occasional shot of 7500 rpms.
If anyone has any info about these transmissions or what I might need to deal with in general feel free to chime in.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> ...I might have a line on a cheap donor car with an auto trans, so I'm considering giving that a shot...
> 
> ...I assume it could handle the occasional shot of 7500 rpms.
> If anyone has any info about these transmissions or what I might need to deal with in general feel free to chime in.


I doubt that it would live long. The TH125 is a pretty weak transmission. Babied, behind a 100hp ICE, that ramps torque in slowly, it can live a long happy life. Behind an instant torque, 7500 rpm, electric motor, I have _serious_ doubts. The guys who tried using them in V8 swaps didn't have a lot of luck, IIRC (you can search Pennock's to verify my sketchy memory on that though). The automatic transmission of choice for Fiero engine swaps is the GM 4T65E (and ultimately the 4T65E-HD, that came behind the supercharged V6s). You probably wouldn't want it though because it's heavier, and has two unneeded gears.

I actually talked to a race transmission shop about building a TH125 (was considering a V8 swap), and the advice was don't waste your time. He showed me some differential components that are about the size of the TH125's. Compared to typical RWD stuff they looked like they were out of a kid's toy.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks, good info. One possible saving grace is the AC induction motor does not produce the same instant torque that a series DC motor does, there is some lag, so it might survive longer in my moderate power AC system, but I'm not sure I want to do all the work and find out it won't.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Thanks, good info. One possible saving grace is the AC induction motor does not produce the same instant torque that a series DC motor does, there is some lag, so it might survive longer in my moderate power AC system, but I'm not sure I want to do all the work and find out it won't.


Talk to a transmission shop. I think the biggest issue is your red line. IIRC, the engines that transmission came behind were pretty low RPM; like 4500 RPM red line.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I'll have to look around and see if any applications used that transmission in higher RPM setups.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

You could always try a simple Honda front wheel drive trans. Should handle the power ok.


----------



## MN Driver (Sep 29, 2009)

Keep in mind that Honda engines often spin backwards. This might not matter so much considering the ac motor could be reversed, I'm assuming easily, not sure if anything else would be different though.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I'm not looking to get into any extra fabrication issues, if I can't bolt it in place as is I'm not touching it  At least the TH125 already has all mounts and axles ready to bolt right up.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

After vacillating about this project on a daily basis I took the plunge today. A rebuilt TH125 for $150 seemed like a pretty good deal, and I'm too intrigued by the concept to pass it up. It seems as if a healthy TH125 can handle a decent amount of power, probably more than my AC31 can dish out, though the RPM's are a bit of a concern. I should be able to keep them within reason most of the time, especially since shifting should be a lot easier than with my clutchless manual setup.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Sounds like a good score.

Thinking more about the durability issues, I wonder if its really that big a deal. Yes, the motor does have torque, but the torque pulses are non existant compared to the OEM engine. Remember a piston engine delivers spikes of torque as it rolls over so I don't think you have much to worry about.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I was most concerned about the 7500 RPM peak of my motor. This post is part of what made me think the TH125 would be up to the task:


> The TH125C used in the Fiero was used beside of the 2.5l I4, and the 2.8/ V6 and I think they were also used in some of the J2000 Sunbird turbos which were rated at 150 hp and that was probably the highest rpm motor it was used beside of and it would have redlined around 5500-6000. There were some Pontiac 6000s with a V6 diesel but I cant recall if they used the TH125C or the TH 440T4 trans. I think that if you use a V6 trans which has more clutch plates in the packs. If you want to get away from the converter and run a separate pump you will need around 80 - 100 psi at full power. The 125 uses a pump drive shaft that runs through the inside of the hollow input shaft so you could connect that to your drive motor which will run the stock pump and if you want the trans to stay in gear at zero rpm you could use a small electric pump that can produce about 30-40 psi and feed that through a check valve into the line pressure test port. The 125 should be able to take 7500 rpm briefly although you will be going pretty pretty fast even in low gear at that rpm.
> I hope this helps.
> Tinkeringgreg


http://www.diyelectriccar.com/forums/showpost.php?p=316578&postcount=454
This trans came out of a V6 car.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

So far I've had no luck finding a torque converter rebuilding company that will sell me the two spline hubs that I need. It seems as if the custom performance shops don't deal with the 125 and I haven't found any large companies that will even answer an email. I did get a TC with the transmission so if I have to I can get that cut apart.
I found the pump that Miz used http://www.steam-brite.com/shurflo-8030813239-150psi-12volt-viton-seals-p-5112.html
but it may be overkill if Greg is correct and I only need 40 psi or so.
The pan does not have a drain plug so I'll either have to pull it and drill a hole, or drill and thread the case the way Miz did for a pickup. A pressure tank/accumulator would be a lot easier, but not sure about the expense, or how large it should be.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Have you considered a gear reduction between the motor and trans? A simple planetary gear that would bring the trans speed down a bit. This would utilize all the trans gears better, and allow full use of the motors high rpms.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

No, probably no room, and I have enough to deal with just getting this all to work properly, and am trying to keep costs in line. Fact is with a transmission that shifts easily I don't have to take it to 7500 RPM, and there isn't much power left up there anyway. With the way this should be geared I should be breaking speed limits in second before I hit 7500 RPM anyway.


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

Good deal on the transmission for 150. Have you given any thought to using the stock converter just to get it all up and running? You could be getting the shift points figured out while cutting up an extra torque converter in your spare time. 

I just sold my extra fiero transmission not too long ago. I would have cut the converter open to check it out for you. If I find one in the salvage yard before you get this going I'll get it and post some pics of the inside.

There are lots of th125s at my local junk yard.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Cool, this should be fun to see happen!  Are you going to try to make it shift like and auto, or go full manual like Miz?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

DanGT86 said:


> Good deal on the transmission for 150. Have you given any thought to using the stock converter just to get it all up and running?


Probably not, since I'd have to build a separate adapter to use the TC.


> I just sold my extra fiero transmission not too long ago. I would have cut the converter open to check it out for you. If I find one in the salvage yard before you get this going I'll get it and post some pics of the inside.
> 
> There are lots of th125s at my local junk yard.


I think I know what I need, just the two female splines that match the pump and drive shafts. I guess a tube would have to be machined from a solid piece, and those splined hubs welded inside, and the outside of the tube machined to seal the transmission output shaft seal, though I'm not even sure that seal is important. On the TH125 it looks as if the main seal is just there to keep fluid from the TC leaking out, and the only flow from the transmission would be the pressure from the hollow shaft to lockup the TC. Since the lockup circuit will never be engaged I don't think there will be any fluid pressure going into the coupler. Maybe


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Cool, this should be fun to see happen!  Are you going to try to make it shift like and auto, or go full manual like Miz?


Not sure, I guess I'm going to see how it behaves and take it from there. Manual shifting would be fine with me.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I was wondering if I put air pressure to the pressure test port would I be able to hear the clutches engaging? That might tell me how much pump pressure I need.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Here is a nice exploded picture diagram of the whole transmission for reference. You can click on various sections and get more detail.
https://www.wittrans.com/Schematic.aspx?Transmission=125/125C


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> On the TH125 it looks as if the main seal is just there to keep fluid from the TC leaking out, and the only flow from the transmission would be the pressure from the hollow shaft to lockup the TC. Since the lockup circuit will never be engaged I don't think there will be any fluid pressure going into the coupler. Maybe


Not quite. There are two small holes behind the seal, I assume for fluid flow between the TC and transmission, separate from the lockup pressure.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Going deeper into the rabbit hole I'm now investigating the mysterious world of T.V. cable actuation  It's supposed to adjust transmission pressure regulation in relation to engine torque, and is regulated by throttle position. Two problems, I've switched to drive by wire, so I guess I'll have to switch back to a cable, and obviously the torque profile of my motor is different than the torque profile of an ICE, so I'm not sure if the regular setup for the cable will be correct. I've been working my way through this series http://www.tvmadeez.com/article/index.html
Once again I've gotten myself in over my head and need to educate myself out of it


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

That was one of the threads I used when making amd setting up my bell crank and cable. What you may want to do, is get a throttle body with the tv cable connection and the tps sensor.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah that seems easier than building the setup from scratch.
Anyone have a link to line pressure numbers for a TH125? Trying to figure out how much pressure I need to hold when stopped to keep the clutches engaged.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Found the numbers in the TH125 PDF I had. Of concern is the high pressure in reverse, minimum 100 psi to max 200-300 psi. This presents a few problems, I probably only need around 50-70 psi to keep the clutches engaged when stopped, but when shifted into reverse that's probably not enough. These numbers also assume a TC spinning at 1000 RPM's at idle running the internal pump. If I use a higher pressure pump then it will probably run too much of the time and over pressurize the system for all situations other than reverse. Also if I have a pump plumbed into the line pressure test port I guess I'd need a one way check valve that could stop 300 or so PSI from feeding back into the pump. 
I'm starting to think I should just go with a TC with a very low stall speed, idle the motor, and change the lockup circuit to engage at lower RPM's. This looks a lot easier, less expensive, with a better chance of operating properly.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Interesting idea, but wouldn't they have to be in series to boost the pressure? And if so it wouldn't work because the one not operating wouldn't allow any flow.


----------



## Carl55 (Jun 9, 2012)

JRP3 said:


> Interesting idea, but wouldn't they have to be in series to boost the pressure? And if so it wouldn't work because the one not operating wouldn't allow any flow.


Some pumps are flow through design.


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

I think you would be fine if you don't reverse like a madman. Once the car starts moving the pressure should be adequate. I wouldn't want to run questionable pressure in a forward gear that gets used constantly but takeoffs in reverse are most likely a small percentage of your driving. 

I like Miz's Idea of tapping the the pump into the high pressure manifold of the trans pump. Let the trans figure out what to do with the pressure the way it was designed to. 

I am pretty sure you are correct that you would want a checkvalve to keep the pressure from pushing back towards the electric pump. The main transmission pump is certainly capable of higher pressures than the aux electric. 

There is also the idea of a hydraulic accumulator to store the 200psi you generate when moving and trigger it when you launch in reverse. These are kinda expensive and would be extra weight.

Converter is looking better all the time. Make sure the 125 shifts right before you start making all kinds of stuff.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

> Some pumps are flow through design.


Good point. Flow through pumps in series would work, as would two different output pumps in parallel. However, I might be over thinking this since the pressures I'm quoting are only for idling at 1000 rpm. I would think that at higher revs either pressure goes higher, and therefor a higher PSI pump would not be a problem and over pressurize the system, or at higher RPM's the valve body reduces the higher pressure and could do the same with higher input pressure from a pump. On the other hand I'm not sure if the line pressure test port that I would be plumbing into is before or after any potential regulating circuits.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

DanGT86 said:


> I think you would be fine if you don't reverse like a madman. Once the car starts moving the pressure should be adequate. I wouldn't want to run questionable pressure in a forward gear that gets used constantly but takeoffs in reverse are most likely a small percentage of your driving.


Probably correct.


> I like Miz's Idea of tapping the the pump into the high pressure manifold of the trans pump. Let the trans figure out what to do with the pressure the way it was designed to.


I like the idea as well, just not going to attempt it with this transmission since I have no idea where I would do it and have no desire to open this thing up.


> There is also the idea of a hydraulic accumulator to store the 200psi you generate when moving and trigger it when you launch in reverse. These are kinda expensive and would be extra weight.


Also someone mentioned in one of the other auto trans threads that an accumulator might cause problems with fluid levels when it dumps extra fluid back in, or takes fluid out. You might be a little under or over filled most of the time.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Yeah, you really shouldnt need 2 pumps. As long as you use the pressure manifold in the system. 2 pumps series would boost the pressure. However, the pressures you were given is the pressure range base on engine speed. All you should need is 80-100 to engage reverse. I set my tv cable to 80psi at idle, had good engagement and disengagement.


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

I think it was mentioned in one of the miz threads that the trans holds some residual pressure for a while. I am not sure that the fluid/pressure is consumed while holding bands and clutches. I wonder if you could build pressure sitting in neutral then drive normally after that. You would only need to rebuild pressure if you were stopped long enough for it to leak down. 

Wish I knew more about transmissions.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Seems to depend a lot on the individual transmission, some people say they have no problem, others have said they bang into gear when taking off. 



> All you should need is 80-100 to engage reverse. I set my tv cable to 80psi at idle, had good engagement and disengagement.


That sounds promising.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

The only issue I saw with Miz's setup, and likely why the electric pump ran more than expected, is the lack of chack valves to prevent the pressure from leaking back through the machanical pump. Or, it could be the sizing of the pump, though, it seems to work good for him. They have small accumulators, should maintain pressure on the system for a decent period, not sure how long. You may not need an e-pump.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

All I've seen so far is this one, $210, 1 qt. (which could over fill the transmission), and it only seems to go to 60 psi.
https://www.cantonracingproducts.com/product/24-046/24-046----ACCUSUMP-1QT-NO-VALVE/


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

It will over fill while you're sitting. As soon as you start to drive, the accumulator will fill back up andthe pan will be at propper level. Or, get a deeper pan and sump. Instead of filling it to the added capacity, allow the accumulator to fill and draw as needed.
Oh yeah, if thats an auto trans accumulator, it should handle over 300psi. Not sure what the back pressue. Or the air/nitro charge on the back side should be. That may be an engine oil unit, only handling 65psi.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah it's an engine oil unit.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The guy finally cut my TC apart, said it was a bitch of a job using his plasma cutter, lots of smoke and flames. Kind of expected that with the trans oil residue. Now I have to see if the other guy I've been talking to can turn these things down and make them up into an adapter.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> The guy finally cut my TC apart, said it was a bitch of a job using his plasma cutter, lots of smoke and flames. Kind of expected that with the trans oil residue. Now I have to see if the other guy I've been talking to can turn these things down and make them up into an adapter.


Nice. Looks easy from here on out, right?


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Looks like a real learning opportunity.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Oh yeah  My curiosity has taken over my common sense on this one, hopefully it will all come together. Frustrating part is being so dependent on others to get this thing going. I'm still trying to track down transmission mounts, cable, shifter, TV cable and throttle body, without buying a whole parts car, and reliable, fast, machine work around here has so far been elusive. Every time I walk past the transmission sitting on the shop floor I can feel it mocking me


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Got the pump spline and main drive spline turned down and a centering fixture made. Had a bushing pressed into my existing coupler that the pump spline fits into, but I was hoping for a press fit for the pump spline into that bushing and only ended up with a slip fit. Probably not a big deal since it will all be welded together.


----------



## TEV (Nov 25, 2011)

JRP3 said:


> Since it will all be welded together.


you should ask for a second opinion regarding the welding of those splines , the heat may "unharden" the spline.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I think the actual splines have enough material between them and where the weld will be, and doing the welding in stages should keep things within an acceptable range. Don't have much choice either way.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> I think the actual splines have enough material between them and where the weld will be, and doing the welding in stages should keep things within an acceptable range. Don't have much choice either way.


Looks good J. You could also have it TIG'd, which would help keep the heat concentrated in the weld area.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Picked up this used 60 PSI 2 GPM Delavan pump on Ebay for $34 including shipping. Similar to the one KansasEV used. Hopefully it will have enough GPM and pressure for my transmission but it was cheap enough to just try it and see. Feels like a pretty beefy unit.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Since I'm using the throttle body cams to get the proper ratio between throttle movement and the T.V. cable for the trans it would be nice to use the TPS sensor for my throttle signal.










Problem is the sensor only goes down to around 2K Ohms and I need it go go below 1K Ohm. So first thing I did was drill out the plug over the idle screw and backed it out as far as possible, which got me below 2K but not low enough. Then I took off the TPS and ground down the low end stop, which got me to .94K Ohm.










But when I tried to attach it to the throttle body it interfered with part of the housing, so I ground that down too, bent the tab on the TPS a bit to engage properly, and now it's working perfectly.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Trying to figure out how much of the torque converter hub is needed to properly engage the seal in the transmission. Initially I thought I needed a bit of the flange to press against the seal, but the machinist I'm working with doesn't think so. I also noticed that the Powerglide coupler has no flange and is just a smooth shaft. The flange would mean that if the adapter is not perfectly spaced the flange could put too much pressure on the seal. So does anyone know if the TC butts up against the seal and I need a bit of a shoulder or if all the sealing is done on the hub? Here is a pic to show what I'm talking about:


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

It is a radial seal that will seal anywhere along the tc drive. The flange does not seal. The important part, is making sure the TC snub nose is fully engaged in the pump drive. there should be an old black score line or light wear mark around the snub nose where the seal rides.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Actually the TH125 pump is driven by a small splined shaft that runs through the middle of the hollow main drive shaft.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Gotcha. I just noticed the lack of the usual pump drive notches.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Picked up the coupler last night:



















I am concerned that when I mounted it and checked it there is about 15 thousandths of runout. I don't have a dial indicator but bracing a dial caliper against a hard surface and checking the runout I get between 10 and 15 thousandths. The guy said it was true on the lathe but I've mounted the taper lock coupler on the motor twice and it still has the runout. When I check the taper lock hub base that runs true. Is this going to take out my seal prematurely, and if so what are my options to reduce the runout, other than starting over. Can targeted heating and cooling tweak it inline, or a press? It slides into the trans fine so the splines engage alright.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Doing some research on seal run out allowances it looks as if I'm pushing the parameters for acceptable tolerances. Page 16 of this PDF shows a max of .010 at 5K RPM for a 2 inch seal and .008 at 7K RPM. I did notice the outer diameter of the coupler is .006 larger than the TC hub, so I suppose if I can get it trued up by that much from the high side I'd be OK.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Was it welded before, or after the lathe? Is it a smooth run out, or jerk and jump?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I think it was machined after being welded. I guess I'd call it a smooth runout.


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

Could you rig something up to cut or sand it in place using the motor to spin it like a lathe. It wouldn't be easy but it would give you the least amount of runout. Maybe find a way to clamp or bolt something holding a sanding block or file to your adapter plate and move it in gradually while the motor is spinning untill it sands it true. Sorry if that is a longshot. Guess it just depends on how creative you feel like being. 


As a side note. Most of the seal surfaces I machine at work get polished in a lathe with 400 grit sandpaper per the seal manufacturers instructions.


Good luck.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Actually, I did that exact same thing for a transfer case output shaft. I changed to heavy duty drive shaft, welded a new flange onto the slip yoke, and hand "machined" the seal surface. Looked ok, never leaked! Also, changed it from slip, to fixed yoke at the same time! 
You may be pushing the limits of the seal, but I'd be more concerned with the multiple shafts and bearings. Have you had a chance to spin the motor up to speed yet?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Spinning the motor would be ideal but I'd either have to pull the rest of the system out of the car to run it on a bench or put everything back together and do it in the car, then take it back out to install the tranny. I don't want to do either one but it might have to happen.
I've also been reading about the seal finish, seems to be rather critical, at least in some applications. Example:


> National Seals recommends 10 to 20 microinches Ra (.20 to .60 Micrometers) and 30RC minimum.


www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/general/ground-surface-finish-shaft-rubber-oil-seal-205946/ 30RC, WTF is that? Sigh, why did I think this would be easy? 
For the run out, any thoughts on localized heating and cooling near the weld to tweak it into shape? I'm imagining heating one side while holding ice against the other, or something.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

few2many said:


> You may be pushing the limits of the seal, but I'd be more concerned with the multiple shafts and bearings. Have you had a chance to spin the motor up to speed yet?


The pump shaft has play designed into it so that's not a problem, and the runout is less near the base of the coupler so the main drive spline should be ok, I hope, but that's why I'd like to straighten the unit as a whole if possible.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

More on surface finishing if anyone is interested
http://rlhudson.com/Shaft Seal Book/design-shaft3.html
http://rlhudson.com/Shaft Seal Book/design-shaft4.html


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

30Rc is a hardness rating. Its the rockwell C scale. Seals will actually wear the steel down over a long period of time. If its any kind of decent steel its probably already close to or above 30Rc. Localized heating is probably to unpredictable to help you in this case. If that seal is a splash seal only I would just polish the coupler and put it together with the .015 runout. If it holds pressure you may want to proceed with a plan to true it. As to wether or not it holds pressure, i would ask Miz. He knows lots of useful stuff like that.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Miz has been advising me as well. I talked to the guy who did the work and he's willing to do what it takes to get it right, so it's going back to the shop tonight.


----------



## few2many (Jun 23, 2009)

Good info on the reads. Hope it gets straightened out!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Finally got the motor and coupler back tonight. We were aiming for .003 of runout and he was able to get it within .004 but simply could not get it any closer and I told him I wasn't going to worry about the extra .001. I figure if .003 was acceptable and would probably last over 100K miles .004 should last almost as long and certainly way more than I'll ever see with the driving I'll do. Hope I'm right


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Finally got the motor and coupler back tonight. We were aiming for .003 of runout and he was able to get it within .004 but simply could not get it any closer and I told him I wasn't going to worry about the extra .001. I figure if .003 was acceptable and would probably last over 100K miles .004 should last almost as long and certainly way more than I'll ever see with the driving I'll do. Hope I'm right


Sounds reasonable. Do you have everything you need to start putting it together now? I'm curious to see the results, and how you like the auto compared to the manual. Back to back comparisons like this don't really happen often.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I still need a check valve for the pump and some fittings, but I'll be starting to put it all back together today. Just remembered I also need some new axles too.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Putting the transmission in was a little more exciting than it needed to be. Using the electric loader, now running well at 24V, I easily hoisted up the transmission with it, until "splat" and hydraulic fluid started leaking all over the place from the cylinders. Who would have though that 40+ year old hydraulic cylinders that had been through a fire might start leaking at an inopportune moment  Not wanting to abort the mission after waiting all this time I scrambled to get the transmission in place over the engine bay before I lost too much fluid and pressure. Got it pretty much into position and grabbed some boards to block up the loader, then was able to lower it into place with the lift rope and some wrangling. Of course the auto trans seems to be a bit larger in some crucial places so it was a bit of a struggle and I had to unbolt one battery bank to just get enough room by sliding it back a bit. Anyway, it's in and nothing was damaged in the process, (besides the loader cylinders of course). Looks as if the motor will have to go in by hand, which I've done before, but there was a lot more room to work with when the manual trans was in there.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Putting the transmission in was a little more exciting than it needed to be... I scrambled to get the transmission in place over the engine bay before I lost too much fluid and pressure... then was able to lower it into place with the lift rope and some wrangling...


Sounds amusing, you should video this stuff so we can have fun at your expense!  J/k, looking good.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah I should have had a camera rolling. Never know when you might get a good Youtube moment


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

The fun never ends. Since the loader cylinders were blown I built a "cylinder" out of wood to hold the bucket up to use as an engine hoist so I could place the motor without killing myself.










That worked relatively well but no matter how I tried I could not get the motor to fully seat with the transmission. I bolted the coupler to the motor and tried to line it up with the transmission. Normally of course you install the TC into the transmission by spinning it as you push in, then install the motor and bolt the TC to the flywheel. However I have no flywheel and it's not possible to access the taperlock bolts for the coupler with the motor installed since this transmission only has a small access hole, unlike a TH350/400, etc. I couldn't even get my hand up in there to rotate the coupler while drawing it together, so I sawzalled a slightly larger hole. Still no good. After fighting with it for a couple of days I pulled the motor back out and found the problem, a slight ridge was left inside the coupler which would not clear the splines. Back to the machine shop to get that removed. Finally after much struggling I was able to get it mated properly and installed, coupler was a really tight fit, probably too tight, but it's in and I'm not taking it back out unless it breaks. 
Now the shifter for the auto trans is in a slightly different location than the manual and is interfering with one of my battery banks, I think I can just remount the bank at a slight angle to clear the shifter.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Between the tractor and the car you're just having more fun than you can stand! Looks like you are making progress on both though.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

"Now what?" has become a common theme for me lately, often stated using different terms


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

After some more "now what?", "WTF?" and "I'm going to drop a crowbar across the battery terminals and walk away!" moments this thing actually seems to be working. Most frustrating was after putting it all back together for what I thought was the final time, spinning the motor and running it through the gears, I found fluid leaking from the bell housing. I figured it was the main seal leaking because of too much runout in the coupler, but the fluid was coming from the motor side. Turns out the coupler welds were not airtight and the machinist never pressure checked it, and neither did I. So I had a plug made to seal off the back of the coupler, put it all back together and spun it up, no leaks. I still need to hook up the 12V external pump but I drove it around a bit and it seems to shift properly, though I will want to adjust the TV cable and see if I can raise the shift points.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> After some more "now what?", "WTF?" and "I'm going to drop a crowbar across the battery terminals and walk away!" moments...


Translation = he was working on a car. 





JRP3 said:


> ...I drove it around a bit and it seems to shift properly, though I will want to adjust the TV cable and see if I can raise the shift points.


Nice. Congrats!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I think I have the 12V pump mostly sorted, I kept losing prime after running it for a while, but I think I just didn't have enough fluid in the transmission. The only problem now is that when the car is stopped my 12V pump cycles rapidly. It hits 60psi but only holds for less than a second and kicks on again. I'll have to see how annoying it is but I guess the only solution would be a pressure tank. Maybe an external adjustable pressure switch could work if the clutches will stay locked up at lower pressures to provide some hysteresis.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Minor issues aside, how do you like it so far, compared the manual?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Haven't taken it out of the garage with the 12V pump hooked up and the proper fluid level in it yet, just tested it up on jacks and going back and forth in the garage. My initial drive without the 12V pump felt very sluggish, so I'm a bit concerned about the actual drive ratio for this transmission. I did find the tire pressure was down around 20lbs after sitting for almost a year which didn't help. Not sure when I'll get to do a real road test though since I now have another problem, one of the new tires I got won't pop onto the bead all the way. The tire shop said they had a problem mounting both of them but they got the one to pop into place eventually, the other simply would not. It holds air but it's hung up on the rim protector ridge. I've tried bouncing it on the ground, hitting it with a sledge hammer, no go. They said to try putting it on the car and driving it around and maybe that will do it. This car simply does not want to be back on the road again.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

I see. I wonder if the diff gears from one of the manual transaxles would swap in the auto?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I'd be surprised if they would interchange, but there were different final drive sprockets for this transmission, so I might be able to find something if I need it. Drove it around with the funky tire, it didn't seat, so I'll try another tire shop. The car did feel better with some air in the tires, even with the weird one. However after driving it and getting the trans fluid warm it seems as if my 12V pump wasn't building up enough pressure and engaging the clutches properly all the time. The hottest part of the transmission case was showing 120F with an IR thermometer. I might need an actual trans cooler instead of just looping the hose back on itself.


----------



## mizlplix (May 1, 2011)

Carnauba paste car wax the safety bead area. Put the tire in a inflation cage. Back up.

It will go on.

My powerglide ran at 140 F. (It would have to go to 230 F before I got worried.)

miz


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Thanks for the tire tip, I'll suggest it to the tire place if they can't get it to go.
My trans temp was after about 5 miles of driving on a 70F day, I'm a bit concerned with longer trips on hotter days. Of course I'm more concerned with the loss of clutch engagement. I guess the heat is thinning out the fluid enough that it won't build pressure? I might need to increase the size of my intake hose which is only 5/16.


----------



## mizlplix (May 1, 2011)

You are lucky, my pump ran constantly when stopped and turned off at about 3-4 mph when the main pump came on good.

BTW: my inlet and pressure hoses were only 1/4" ID. And they worked fine.


My pump pressure was 140psi. And about 2.2 Gpm. 


Most of the trans heating comes from the planetaries which are cooled by the oil. Shift out of low gear as soon as possible to keep oil temps down.


If you are certain you get a oil voscocity related pressure drop, you have a input shaft seal problem inside the high gear drum.


Put a "tee" fitting in the tap you use where you put pump pressure into the trans. Run a hose up into the car and a gauge, so you can read pressures hot and cold to troubleshoot.


Miz


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

My pump is 60 PSI and 2 GPM. I was using a lot of first gear, with my current final gear ratio I pretty much have to, 2nd is a real dog. Might be time to upgrade from my 550 amp Curtis to the 650 amp 7601 to increase my torque.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

mizlplix said:


> Carnauba paste car wax the safety bead area. Put the tire in a inflation cage. Back up.
> 
> It will go on.
> 
> ...


I used to use a shot of starting fluid, and a lit match.  Ditto "back up"! 

It's not exactly recommended, but it will seat a stubborn tire. I had one that I couldn't get to go, even with that and took it to a tire shop. Their "secret" is they use a really fast, high volume, high pressure, shot of air - basically similar to what the starter fluid does, but safer. They also use a soapy solution to lube it. They made it look like child's play after I had been throwing air, starting fluid, and matches at it for hours.  Maybe your tire shop is just trying to push it out with normal compressedair and not able to blast it quickly enough. My compressor was a 175psi industrial unit - but I couldn't get enough air through fast enough (even with the core out), and wasn't crazy enough to use enough starting fluid.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Took the tire to another shop, they struggled with it for about 15 minutes but finally got it to pop on, with over 100 psi, and no tire cage  They did use some lube that looked like a big tub of white wax. 
I decided to increase the pump intake hose to 3/8 to match the output hose, figured less restriction/more volume couldn't hurt. I've put about 20 miles on it and it seems to be working properly. I realized that one reason it feels sluggish is the TPS I'm using for a throttle has more pedal travel than the foot pedal box I used before, so I really need to mash the pedal a lot more than I used to. Pickup is still not as good as I remember, but since it's been about a year since I drove it with the old setup it's hard to tell for sure how much it's changed. Once I get a valid inspection sticker on it I can do some comparison testing using my previous test routes. Seems as if current draw is higher than with the manual, but maybe some of that is because this is a rebuilt transmission that might need to break in some? With this transmission and one inch smaller diameter tires I can do over 50 mph in first gear. The old trans was around 43 in first and 65 in second.


----------



## tomofreno (Mar 3, 2009)

Over a year! I admire your perseverance JRP3. What rpm are you at at 50 mph in 1st? I think I am at 5800 rpm at 50 mph in 2nd gear. Hope you get to enjoy the car this summer.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Since I blew the comm port in the controller a while back I no longer get data from the 840 display, so if I'm hitting my max rpm then it's 7500, since I raised it up from stock. Probably not actually that high since there is very little power left around that speed.


----------



## onegreenev (May 18, 2012)

By the seat of the pants, how does it feel when you drive the AC-31? I have heard it is not such a powerful motor and its no longer supported.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

As I said with my new gearing it's a bit weaker than what I was hoping. I think the AC31 just turned into the AC35 with the 650 amp controller. It has more torque than the AC 50 but it drops off around 2kRPM. I was really hoping for a higher voltage controller with 650 amps, I think it would really wake this motor up, but that didn't happen. I might upgrade to the 650 amp controller at some point for the extra torque.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

It's official, this setup is significantly less efficient  I just ran my test route, 20 miles that used to consistently take 47-48 ah, today it took 60 ah. Used 1st to accelerate up to about 40 and then kept it in 2nd at a fairly steady 55 mph. No belly pan so that might have taken a few points off but my new 195/55/15 tires should have lower resistance than the old almost bald 245/50/15's I was running. I'll have to run it again after I get it inspected and can put the belly pan back in place but I'm not expecting any miracles. I do hope after some miles maybe the transmission will break in a bit and give me a little better efficiency, other than that I don't know where I'm losing it.


----------



## Russco (Dec 23, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> It's official, this setup is significantly less efficient  I just ran my test route, 20 miles that used to consistently take 47-48 ah, today it took 60 ah. Used 1st to accelerate up to about 40 and then kept it in 2nd at a fairly steady 55 mph. No belly pan so that might have taken a few points off but my new 195/55/15 tires should have lower resistance than the old almost bald 245/50/15's I was running. I'll have to run it again after I get it inspected and can put the belly pan back in place but I'm not expecting any miracles. I do hope after some miles maybe the transmission will break in a bit and give me a little better efficiency, other than that I don't know where I'm losing it.


Did you have a manual transmission before? My EV also has a factory automatic transmission, but with torque converter. I am very interested in how your transmission setup works out for you..


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

From what I read, the hottest your transmission got was 120F on the outside? Guessing you were closer to 130 internal, which is still pretty low.

How long was the drive and what was the average transmission temperature in the recent trip? Low trans temp will increase the fluid viscosity and will reduce efficiency. Switching to synthetic might help (assuming you haven't already) but don't expect any miracles.

Its a bit of a catch 22 with slush boxes. Hotter transmissions are emitting more heat (and wasting more energy) but cold transmissions put up more resistance for power transfer. Many newer vehicles have thermostatically controlled transmission coolers for this reason.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Russco said:


> Did you have a manual transmission before? My EV also has a factory automatic transmission, but with torque converter. I am very interested in how your transmission setup works out for you..


Yes, previously had a 5 speed manual without a clutch. Other than the efficiency loss, and the weaker gearing, I like the way the auto works. Most of the time I manually shift it since it shifts much too soon on it's own unless I'm really hammering it. I may try to adjust the TV cable to move the shift points higher.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

david85 said:


> Its a bit of a catch 22 with slush boxes. Hotter transmissions are emitting more heat (and wasting more energy) but cold transmissions put up more resistance for power transfer.


I figured my 120F temps were pretty reasonable and meant I wasn't wasting too much power, but I see your point about increased resistance. I'll have to do some tests on a 90F day to see if temps go higher and if efficiency increases at all. I suppose I could wrap a few loops of hose around the motor to add heat to the trans fluid.


----------



## Russco (Dec 23, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Yes, previously had a 5 speed manual without a clutch. Other than the efficiency loss, and the weaker gearing, I like the way the auto works. Most of the time I manually shift it since it shifts much too soon on it's own unless I'm really hammering it. I may try to adjust the TV cable to move the shift points higher.


It looks like your comparison of the manual to auto transmission shows the manual was 25% more efficient than the auto. I have the same three speed 125 auto in my gas Corsica and it operates well and gives over 30 MPG at 70 MPH. It does have a lock up converter than unlocks each time the accelerator is released. The wife's Century with the four speed electronic operated transmission gets much poorer mileage, even though both cars have the 3.1 V6.

My current EV, a factory converted Metro with the stock 3 speed automatic torque converter without lockup, has a great amount of power even with the Curtis 1221B controller. The torque converter should give about 2X torque, so with the lockup provision your transmission has, why didn't you leave the torque converter and use the lockup in second and third gears? Sort of a "have your cake and eat it too." You would have twice the torque upon start up at the sacrifice of additional motor KW and the efficiency of a direct clutch at cruise.


----------



## mizlplix (May 1, 2011)

FWIW: Lock up converters are used on any automatic that has an overdrive gear. The stator tries to turn backwards and causes over heating. So they lock the converter in late 3rd gear before the shift.

You can wire in a lock switch and place a sensor in the pressure port for second gear, so it will lock early. This is done by hyper milers every day.


Once you get rid of the torque converter, the efficiency comes back up near to a manual transmission. So, EV,ers that do the converter less thing are actually not at all at a handicap. 


Miz


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

That was my thought, I'd get rid of the weight and inefficiency of the TC going direct drive, and avoid having to idle the motor, another loss. Since with my manual the 6.8 overall ratio of 2nd gear was fine for most of my driving I figured the 9 to one ratio of first in the auto would be even better, though not as good as the 12.5 to one ratio of the manual 1st, which I rarely used. However off the line in 1st it doesn't feel as quick as I remember 2nd being with the manual, and there is the large efficiency loss. The transmission does not seem to be getting excessively hot, I saw 130F case temp yesterday after tromping on it for a while in 70F weather, so I don't know where the loss is coming from.


----------



## mizlplix (May 1, 2011)

You can always Tee in a pressure gauge and monitor your transmission clutch pressures to ensure you do not have any clutches slipping. But, at the temperature you have, it seems normal.

The ring and pinion in an automatic is many times of a higher ratio to give better cruising economy and relied on the torque converter to cover up the bottom end loss of torque.

You can try an inch shorter tire to make up the difference.

Miz


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I already did exactly that, running a 23 inch diameter instead of the old 24 inch with the manual. However I don't know the exact ratio of this transmission, never could find any markings that matched what should be on the transmission, but with my tire diameter, being able to do 50 mph in first, assuming around a 6500-7k red line, that should put it around 9:1.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Just observing the comments and your feedback, it really _seems_ like it's the loss of torque multiplication in the converter that is leading to the car being more sluggish.

Could you be using that much more energy to create enough torque to compensate (sticking your foot that much deeper in the throttle) to cause the efficiency problem? Do you have logs to compare?


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Even without a TC the auto in first at 9:1 should feel significantly better than the manual in second at 6.8:1, and my test drive route is mostly steady speed at 55 mph. But yes, to get any feel of performance I have to get deeper into the pedal and draw more current, but when I did my test route I took it easy so as not to skew the results. I'm going to try another run and use third this time as much as possible to see if I'm having efficiency loss in the lower gears.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

JRP3 said:


> Even without a TC the auto in first at 9:1 should feel significantly better than the manual in second at 6.8:1, and my test drive route is mostly steady speed at 55 mph. But yes, to get any feel of performance I have to get deeper into the pedal and draw more current, but when I did my test route I took it easy so as not to skew the results. I'm going to try another run and use third this time as much as possible to see if I'm having efficiency loss in the lower gears.


That's kind of my point. You could be using more energy to get it to "feel" like it did with the manual. It would have been interesting to see acceleration numbers with the manual, compared to the TC-less auto, to see if it's actually accelerating slower, or just feels slower...


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Definitely slower. My 0-60 looking at the GPS was around 16-17 with the manual, now it seems to be around 23. Plus the increased energy use at a fairly steady speed.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Some good news. I did another test run using 3rd gear as much as possible, and with the belly pan installed, and almost hit the same efficiency numbers as with the manual. Actually the numbers were the same but my overall average speed was slightly lower, probably because I was trying to hold a steady speed without aggressively compensating for the weak feel in third. It seems that for whatever reason 3rd gear is much more efficient in this transmission than 2nd. My transmission temps were higher, about 150F case temp, but it was also about 80F air temp. If I could find a final drive gear set to significantly lower the overall ratio, (raise it numerically), to get some low end and make 3rd gear not feel like such a marshmallow this might not be quite the disaster it seemed to be initially.


----------



## mizlplix (May 1, 2011)

Traditionally, a manual transmission had lower gears than an auto.

Could your manual transaxle R&P fit the auto? 

Did you ever count the gear teeth?

Miz

BTW: In a dual planetary transmission, one gear might be easier to turn due to the way the power flows thru. Second might use both planetaries where third might only use one (meaning less friction).


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Don't know about the manual R&P fitting in the auto. I mistakenly thought I could pull the side cover and maybe swap out the drive and driven gears and the chain to change the ratio, but I'd actually have to go deeper and split the case to get to them, and I assume the R&P. I'm not interested in taking this thing apart and pulling the transmission yet again, so for now at least I'm just going to live with it and try and use 3rd as much as I can.


----------



## Russco (Dec 23, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> Don't know about the manual R&P fitting in the auto. I mistakenly thought I could pull the side cover and maybe swap out the drive and driven gears and the chain to change the ratio, but I'd actually have to go deeper and split the case to get to them, and I assume the R&P. I'm not interested in taking this thing apart and pulling the transmission yet again, so for now at least I'm just going to live with it and try and use 3rd as much as I can.


Glad to hear high gear is working for you. In my Metro automatic, first is 2.8, second 1.5, and third 1.0. I find second draws less watts/mile than first at 30 MPH, but it's easier to pull higher current in second since it takes just a little pedal movement to double current. I am considering removing the torque converter and going direct like you did, but feel I would lose the 2:1 torque multiplication of the torque converter and thus not make it up my very steep driveway. As it is now, the car has lots and lots of power and is very easy to operate with the automatic. 

Still, I think 250 watts/mile @ 30 MPH in a 1850# car with a CD of .32 is a little high. Tires at 40 PSI. Car at 6000 original miles. Transmission is a manual shift automatic, i.e. place in 2, car starts and stays in 2, place in D car starts and stays in D. It does not up-shift automatically like a regular gas automatic.

Keep us updated on your Pontiac.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Russco said:


> Still, I think 250 watts/mile @ 30 MPH in a 1850# car with a CD of .32 is a little high. Tires at 40 PSI.


That does sound high for 30 MPH. My 2500lb Fiero with the manual did about 260 watt hours/mi in mixed driving with speeds up to 55 mph, and hills, tires at 38 PSI.


----------



## Russco (Dec 23, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> That does sound high for 30 MPH. My 2500lb Fiero with the manual did about 260 watt hours/mi in mixed driving with speeds up to 55 mph, and hills, tires at 38 PSI.


Interesting, my automatic transmission acts just like a gas car by providing braking! The Advance 8 inch series motor provides no regenerative braking with the Curtis 1221B controller, and placing the transmission in neutral provides excellent coasting, but placing the transmission in gear does indeed provide braking. Drive gives some braking, 2 gives more braking and 1 provides lots of braking. Nice to have braking going downhill, but I wonder if this braking is also "on" during motoring. A manual transmission EV will provide no braking with the series motor no matter what gear the transmission is in. But my automatic transmission sure provides braking when in gear. 

Does your Fiero provide braking without using the AC controller regenerating braking? That is, just coasting in gear with no power to the controller. The transmission front pump requires a whopping 2 hp. in neutral just to apply the front band. Perhaps the torque converter is sloshing (redirecting?) fluid during coasting in gear, providing a braking effect.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I haven't tried shutting off the controller but I assume with the power and efficiency loss I'm seeing in the lower gears that there must be some drag in 1st and 2nd that I didn't have with the manual. Or did you mean just holding a neutral pedal position with no power in or out of the motor? Haven't tried that specifically.
For a small car efficiency benchmark I always use the Tesla Roadster which got 220 wh/mi on it's mixed driving test cycle. 2700 lbs, .35 cd


----------



## Russco (Dec 23, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> I haven't tried shutting off the controller but I assume with the power and efficiency loss I'm seeing in the lower gears that there must be some drag in 1st and 2nd that I didn't have with the manual. Or did you mean just holding a neutral pedal position with no power in or out of the motor? Haven't tried that specifically.
> For a small car efficiency benchmark I always use the Tesla Roadster which got 220 wh/mi on it's mixed driving test cycle. 2700 lbs, .35 cd


The Corsica THM125C for 1987 was available in 3.18 and 3.43 ratio.
1988 3.18
1989 3.18
1990 2.84 3.18
1991 2.84 3.18
1992 3.18 2.53 and 2.84

Fiero may be different. The 5 speed was 3.61 for all years.


----------



## DanGT86 (Jan 1, 2011)

Using an input chain ratio of 33:37 and a 3.33 final gear gets the th125 to a final drive ratio of 3.73:1 I believe that i the max with factory parts. Not sure gm ever put this combo together so you would have to scavenge from multiple transmissions. Something to think about if you ever go back into it.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah I came to the same conclusion. I might need parts from a 440 auto to do it. I was hoping I could at least get to 4:1, not sure it would be worth the effort otherwise.


----------

