Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: KaptKaos Jan 26 2009, 12:24 PM

There's a fellow selling a motor in the classifieds. Here's the link:

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=92077

Seems normal enough. I assume, maybe wrongly, that this person is using the car for an electric conversion.

I have no issue with people converting their cars to electric motors. However, I am wondering if it is reasonable to ask or inform the people that are looking to do this to please try to use '76 cars? This is particularly important in California, as the smog checks in California aren't required on Pre-76 cars.

There are two counter arguments that I can think of and they are:

1) '76 cars are fairly rare, and therefore either more expensive and/or harder to find.
2) The point of an electric conversion is to reduce emissions, so using a car that has higher emissions makes more sense.

I am not sure if this is practical/possible/reasonable/feasible, so I figured that I'd ask.

Am I out of line here?

Please note that I mean no ill will to the seller above.

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 12:43 PM

I'm not sure I understand your question?

Are you trying to encourage people to heavily modify only post 1975 914's, or are you saying because of their scarcity, to heavily modify only pre-1976 914's?

As for an electric conversion, it is obviously a radical modification to the 914. As is a Subi conversion or a V-8 conversion. So are you against these conversions, or are you just against electric conversions?

Eric Read

Posted by: r_towle Jan 26 2009, 12:44 PM

I say to let them use whatever they want.
From what I have seen, based upon the current technology with batteries, most people do the conversion, then give up on it after a few years...when its time to replace the batteries.
Its all bolt in stuff that can be removed.

Rich

Posted by: KaptKaos Jan 26 2009, 01:02 PM

- That's perfect.

Eric- Maybe I wasn't very clear.

Is it reasonable to ask these folks to try and find '76 cars for their conversions?

I added the rebuttals just for the sake of argument.

Posted by: Vacca Rabite Jan 26 2009, 01:27 PM

In short, no. Its not reasonable.

Zach

Posted by: rick 918-S Jan 26 2009, 01:40 PM

Until battery technology makes some serious strides I think an electric conversion is a waste of time and money. The only batteries worth using are priced higher than the national debt. Lead acid batteries are heavy, short duration, and cause more polution to manufacture and dispose of than all the gas you could burn for the next two years. (the life of the batteries) So IMHO electric is not green and should be taken on as a fun hobby and not a serious life style change.

Posted by: GeorgeRud Jan 26 2009, 01:53 PM

I'd agree with Rick, there are no truly viable energy storing devices out there yet. Batteries need to come a long way (increase in power storing capacity and decrease in price) before they are a good choice, and capacitors/etc. just aren't out there yet. I think once they do, you'll see many people converting (or manufacturers producing) electric cars.

The current rage over hybrids doesn't seem to make much sense either, as they seem to combine the complications of gasoline power with the electronics of electric as well. Maybe the way diesel locomotives have done things all these years may make sense some day for automobiles! Or perhaps it's time for a resurgance of steam after all these years! It's fun to dream.

Posted by: Elliot Cannon Jan 26 2009, 01:54 PM

Joes comment, I believe is mostly for California people since 1976 cars are required to have the mandatory smog check. Because of that, they cannot be modified much, if at all (with an electric conversion being an exception). That would leave all the pre 76 cars available for modification (V8, large type IV, six etc). There is a nice 76 with a salvage title for sale here on the central California coast that would be a great candidate for electric conversion. If you are thinking of doing an electric conversion in California, I would encourage you to look for a 76.

Cheers, Elliot

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 02:09 PM

I really don't understand some of these postings that are so angry regarding electrical conversions? If I ever decided to convert my '74 914 to batteries, it would be my decision, not yours.

I am also surprised that many of the owners out there that would take their 914 into a major non-stock modifications (V8, large type IV, six etc) would be so judgemental regarding anyone that would electrify their 914!

As for leaving the pre-76 914's open to modification (V8, large type IV, six etc), the California exemption for pre-1976 cars from emission testing is specifically for vehicles that are in their stock configuration. Once you modify your 914 with a non-stock /6, V8 or large type IV, it is no longer emission testing exempt. So the premise of using only pre-76 vehicles for electrical modification just doesn't hold water...

OK, I guess it's time for the judgemental posters out there to flame me now...

Eric

Posted by: biosurfer1 Jan 26 2009, 02:27 PM

I saw a little promise watching that video of the electric drag racer with that new Li-Ion battery pack he used the last couple races. Much smaller, longer life and held more charge. Looked great until I looked more into it and saw that pack would have cost ~$20,000! There goes any savings...

Posted by: So.Cal.914 Jan 26 2009, 02:39 PM

It does unless some idiot told them it's modified.

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 02:50 PM

Sure, you can lie, cheat and steal. It still doesn't make it legal. You could re-badge a 76 as a 75 and get around the legal requirements too (We've all seen the thread where a certain Atlanta reseller offered to sell the required items to do just that). It doesn't make it right and I wouldn't want to have to explain to the police if I got caught...

Seemingly, if you were in an accident or some other type of event where a police officer inspected the vehicle and found a V8 where a four-cylinder 2.0L engine were expected, I would assume there would be some splaining to do...

I was only assuming that this question was being asked with integrity as to legal requirements. If this thread is based upon the premise that we all misrepresent our vehicles, then the 1976 issue still doesn't hold water.

Eric

Posted by: grantsfo Jan 26 2009, 02:56 PM

I say let the conversions run amock across all model years including 914-6's. Just will increase value of clean stockish cars as they become more scarce.

Posted by: CliffBraun Jan 26 2009, 03:10 PM

It's a $500 ticket and you can't use the car until a ref certifies it's been returned to stock form, not much else.

Posted by: effutuo101 Jan 26 2009, 03:12 PM

as the smog checks in California aren't required on Pre-76 cars.

Hijack

Good to know. I have been doing some research on this. Do you have a one stop web site? the info I have gathered so far is conflicting.

Posted by: rick 918-S Jan 26 2009, 03:14 PM

If your refering to my post Eric I would never flame you or make your choices for you. Who am I to judge you? I'm just stating the facts as I see them. Notice I added (IMHO)
It has always been my understanding that people have been marketing electric vehicle conversions as a green way to go. I simply pointed out the "cons" that are never talked about.
Then there is the issue of climate. Electric cars would never work here. It was 13 below zero here this morning. A battery powered starter on a gas engine doesn't spin over fast enough in these temps to start some cars much less drive to the mall and back. I'm just stating another side of the issue. So for me, it would matter if the electric conversion was in a 1970 or a 1976. I couldn't get around the block today with the current battery tecnology. So, IMHO, battery power is a waste of time.

Remember, This is flat text. It's easy to read things into someones post. Specially if you have an opposing opinion.

Posted by: CliffBraun Jan 26 2009, 03:15 PM

Smog checks are not required, however it is still illegal to modify any emissions equipment by both CA and federal law.

If you get caught (heh), you get the pleasure of returning the car to stock and visiting a smog ref.

There's a thread about me that's got a pretty good primer on this stuff, but that's the summary.

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 03:17 PM

From the California DMV Web page:

Smog Information
Currently, smog inspections are required for all vehicles except diesel powered vehicles, electric, natural gas powered vehicles over 14,000 lbs, hybrids, motorcycles, trailers, or vehicles 1975 and older.

Here's the link: http://dmv.ca.gov/vr/smogfaq.htm#BM2535

Eric Read

Posted by: creeg123 Jan 26 2009, 03:24 PM

I bought a 73 teener that has been converted. It needs new batteries before it will work, and Im moving right now, so its gonna be a while before its running.

The new battery technology is not going to be available (or economical) until at least 2012. Otherwise, you will spend $10K on the Lithium batteries.
Yes, lead acids are heavy, but they can do the job for commutes (up to 30-40 miles). Once the battery technology catches up, there will be electric 914s out there that will blow the doors off any gassers.

I think that everyone is entitled to their opinions- but you have to consider all the factors involved, such as the price of gas (which will probably rise of over the summer), the environment, and the fact that the 914 is a realy good car for this coversion: it looks great, has LOTS of space for batteries, and is easy to work with.

I understand why you would want to only convert post-76 cars, but people can do whatever they want to their cars (with the limits of the law, and sometimes outside that). And besides, where do you draw the line on modifications to your car? Keep it 100% stock? Only use Porsche-approved aftermarket kits? Or is the line drawn at the conversion from gas to electric?

Its up to people to do what they want with their car. That ability to express yourself and be unique through your car is what makes them great.

Posted by: KaptKaos Jan 26 2009, 03:25 PM

You old smoothy!

Thanks for making me look stupider

So yeah, um, what Elliot said.

Posted by: r_towle Jan 26 2009, 03:33 PM

A123Systems.
Check them out. Lithium.
The new pack costs about 10k....but its on its way...
You can buy that now...but I still feel the price is to high.

There are several cool things being done right now.
First and foremost....a 15 minute full charge is the goal, and some companies have built it.. This gets you to a gas station or a recharge station to refuel...that will be cool.
Second..we need to get up to 300 miles per charge...that is also happening..
This part is more about weight and peoples perception about how big and heavy a car really needs to be. This is more social in the US then it is technology.

At this point if we threw all the SUV's out and Pickup trucks that people drive to work...made everyone buy a car that weighs in at 2000lbs or less...then we would be looking at 75 mpg right now with current technology in normal gas powered cars....

For all the people that state "I will never get rid of my SUV/Truck" well, you will keep paying more and more penalties to drive it until it hurts so much in your wallet that you finally move into a fuel efficient car.
We need to make it hurt in this country...its the only way to make change happen.
Look what happened when gas was $4.00 per gallon...


My personal opinion is there will be two emerging systems that will happen and are happening in parallel.
Electric plug in will happen.
High efficiency Diesel will happen.

We need trucks to deliver our goods, so Diesel will get even more money thrown at it over the next ten years.
Electric plug in will be for the rest of us.

To your other point later on in the post...cold weather operation.
Hybrid electric/diesel will be the result.
Diesel works fine in sub zero temps when its properly engineered...so a hybrid will solve the cold issue...

Rich

Posted by: smontanaro Jan 26 2009, 03:47 PM

I've been thinking about an electric conversion but have decided the 914 isn't optimal, at least not for my needs. On the one hand, 914s have two trunks, they are light, etc. I am, however, not in the land of eternal sun. I have been thinking a late-70s to mid-80s 911 conversion might make more sense. It's has a more rust resistant body, is a bit newer so non-ICE replacement bits will be a bit easier to find. The downsides are the lack of a second trunk and a bit more weight, but I think with newer battery technology both will become more tractable problems.

Posted by: rick 918-S Jan 26 2009, 03:49 PM

All good points. But lets move into the inner city and small rural communities with limited income and tell them they need to buy a $80,000.00 electric car they can't fit their family in. And if you don't were going to bankrupt you. So much for freedom of choice. Ya I know, that's a little extreme. I'm all for a better way. But there's alot of smoke and mirrors sales going on out there now. The next wave of tecnological advances won't be doled out to Jon Q. Public without a heavy price tag. Sometimes reality is sobering. At least reality as I see it.

Posted by: creeg123 Jan 26 2009, 03:57 PM

Not necessarily. Yes, Tesla did make a $100K EV sports car (and its fast!). They are working on a sedan that is hopefully going to be in the $30-40K range next. And will be made in USA. Since the big 3 kept their heads in the sand for the last 20 years and only starting on EVs recently, the technology is waaaaaaay behind where it should be. Give it 5-10 years of serious research and advancement (especially in battery technology), and we should have affordable EVs for at least mid-range dollars. Then, the low-end affordable cars shoud hopefully follow after that.

Posted by: So.Cal.914 Jan 26 2009, 04:18 PM

Nothing illegal on your car? Never? No header? Never owned a modified car? Modifing an engine can hardly compare to rebadging a car illegally. Legally as I understand it you can not change any equipment on your street car. Done any of that? If not I am sorry for you, you have missed out on a lot of fun. If so quit acting so "Holier than thou".

Posted by: r_towle Jan 26 2009, 04:56 PM

Couple of replies.
The price point will come down to a competitive price. That will be either with Gov subsidies and or market competition..its just gonna happen.
Only when JohnQ can make a choice dollar for dollar will this work.
At that point, penalties will be appropriate.
Penalties already exist...look at any car built after 1976 in CA....wanna keep it, fix it. Period.
So, same logic will apply. Wanna drive a big Escalade, no problem, we support your freedom to do that. Pay this tax for the priveledge and go on your merry way to the gas station.
Maybe the tax will just be more fuel tax...that would do it.

We need to fix this issue. You may not see it nor do I but please take a look at the sunset pictures in LA....there is a criminal amount of smog there...its harming peoples long term health.
We cant keep growing at the rate we are growing without addressing the need to change our consumptive and pollutant behaviour.

It wont be a federal level thing..it will be state by state. Something YOU can control with your vote.

Rich

Posted by: Phoenix 914-6GT Jan 26 2009, 06:08 PM

So where is all this extra electicity going to come from to charge these cars every night?

Posted by: YksKrad Jan 26 2009, 06:28 PM

They'll just have to run the peak hour plants around the clock.

Posted by: L8KTAHO Jan 26 2009, 06:42 PM

I own a contractor company and need fully loaded work trucks everyday. I have a sister in law who has 5 kids, and needs a huge suv(suburban) to bus them around in. I hate big suv's too, what to do. My entire town(Reno) 400k pop, owns at least "one" truck. This is a mtn. town with lots of snow. Will the electric cars/trucks get towns like mine/colorado/utah/california around in all this snow?

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 07:10 PM

"Holier than thou"

This, from a guy who wants to ban any modifications to a pre-1976 914 unless it's his modifications!

I hope you see how ridiculous that is

All I am trying to point out is that the premise of the 1976 914 being the only car that should be modified to be an electrical vehicle while any pre-1976 914 should be allowed to be modified with a V8 is a silly premise.

And using the California law which allows stock 1975 and older cars to be emission test exempt as a support to your premise is simply bogus.

Eric Read

Posted by: So.Cal.914 Jan 26 2009, 07:32 PM

Well genius those were not my comments, Kapt Kaos wrote this thread. I just thought you were being an asshole and you have yet to disappoint. There are a lot of people here that do not smog their 914's. And a fair chunk of those people have, in one way or another have modified their cars. The ones that do modify their cars wouldn't touch a 76, it has to be smogged. Which would make the 76 the perfect candidate for an electric conversion. No smog.

Posted by: Aaron Cox Jan 26 2009, 07:40 PM

Joe (kapt kalorie)

You got more important things to worry about......













Like 3 weddings to pay for!

Posted by: r_towle Jan 26 2009, 08:36 PM

Solar, wind, tidal.
All work, all are being implemented in large scale outside the US.

Largest producer of solar Electric on earth....Saudi Arabia.
We also have deserts...lets use them.

Wind...see Picketts plan...it makes sense.
UK, largest wind farm in the world...no one can see it from land.

Tidal...see UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Netherlands...huge tidal turbines generating major amounts of Electricity.

OR
We could build more coal plants to keep the existing rich businessmen wealthy..
Or, we could build more nuclear plants and give the waste storage issue to our grandchildren.

We need more power plants...that is a fact.
Why build crappy old technology coal plants??? I dont get that.

Why build nuclear plants with no disposal method...its the NIMBY (Not in My back Yard) principle..hell, we cant transport nuclear waste on the highway or across state lines. In some states it is not allowed in the state at all.
How does Nuclear make sense??

Even with our existing electrical power plants, those can be made alot cleaner if they are forced to do so. Its money...

Instead of regulation...offer us ALL, the whole country a choice of where to buy power...buy green, renewable power or buy coal power..
What would you buy if you had a choice and the price was the same?
It happens in my state. We buy 100% renewable power by choice.

It is a choice.
For the people who need an SUV...we need to ask for a greener solution.
For 50Billion dollars of tax money and more to follow dont you think we should ask GM, Chrysler and Ford to make something greener...
If not, lets not give them that money and give it to a car company that WILL make greener cars..

Larger trucks need diesel/hybrid...or natural gas (I dont buy that part of Picketts plan)

RIch

Posted by: smontanaro Jan 26 2009, 08:50 PM

Not immediately, but someday, maybe? One thing to understand is that a switch from gas to electric is not likely to ever be 100%, certainly not in the next couple decades, but if lots of people who can drive electric (or take public transit or telecommute or carpool or ...) do, then there will be that much more oil left for people who have no other viable option.

Posted by: YksKrad Jan 26 2009, 08:58 PM

I agree and disagree... Personally I'd rather have Nuclear than coal power, but I think something needs to be done with the waste materials. Find a method of removing the spent isotopes and re-refining it for use in reactors. If they are still radioactive then there is still energy to be had there. And I like the idea of the waste being contained. I'd rather it be buried in the desert somewhere with 13 legged scorpions running around rather than a coal plant spewing toxic gasses into the air.

Personally the fear of the transporting it cracks me up. Once every couple years they would take a nuclear flask on the railroad behind my house. And every time a bunch of scared old people sat in lawn chairs with Geiger counters to 'check' them as they passed. Has anyone seen the testing those flasks underwent. They slammed into them with train above operating speeds and only dented 'em. youtube it, the wrecks are awesome!

I dunno, that's my $0.02 for what it's worth. (Likely less than two pennies)

Granted I've grown up scared of the threat of skin cancer due to the release CFCs from spray deodorant rather than nuclear winter.

Posted by: ericread Jan 26 2009, 09:22 PM

I had to think about your reply for a few minutes...

I have no problem with people who modify their 914s, either to bigger engines or to electric cars.

The premise of this thread was to limit the type of conversion so that the bigger engine cars would have the 1975 and older bodies while the 1976 bodies could be used for electric conversions. The basis of this seperation was the California emission exemption rule.

My point of contention is as follows:
1. The California emission exemption does not support the transfer of bigger engines to the 1975 and older bodies.
2. The California emission exemption does apply to electric conversions.

So it becomes pretty clear that the initial premise of the argument is not valid.

There's no doubt someone can get away with DMV violations by ignoring the laws. But the premise was based upon using the California DMV law, not ignoring the DMV laws.

So a premise was presented, and I demonstrated that based on the premise, the argument was not valid.

You seem to be offering a different premise, based upon the idea that by ignoring DMV laws, it's easier to license modified pre-1976 914's. Therefore the pre-1976 914s should be left to the engine modification people. That's a premise which is much different than the original premise, and should stand or fail on it's own merit.

If this discussion makes me an Assho__, then so be it.

From now on you should address me by the following title: "Your Assholiness"

Eric

BTW: My car is stock with the following exception, I replaced the original air cleaner wth one from K&N, and I have the certification from K&N that demonstrates the State of California finds the replacement air filter setup acceptable in meeting emission requirements for the State of California. And just in case, I have kept the original air cleaner should I be mandated to replace it.

Posted by: ChrisNPDrider Jan 26 2009, 10:08 PM

BE THE CHANGE!

For those that wait until it is the "best decision" you will be content to be another sheep in the flock. Our country was founded by rebel risk takers and I hope I some day save enough $$$ to do an EV 914!

Right now, I'd rather keep the 914 as budget cafe racer and do an EV mini-pickup with batteries in the bed = simple fab, cheap, easy, done!

If you are the type of guy who will stop in Walmart and tell a woman how to raise her kids, then go ahead and say ONLY 1976 914s for EVs....if your that type it fits. Otherwise, if it's your car, you can do what you please to it

Unmolested stock 914s are getting more unique every day

Posted by: KaptKaos Jan 26 2009, 10:32 PM

And you have 1 to plan for smart ass!



Geez - sorry for all of the drama. Ask a simple question..... well, maybe not so simple.

Anyways, I will defer to my silvery tongued (and silvery haired) friend Elliot, where he politely asked people looking for EV conversions to try and use '76 chassis cars.

Posted by: TimK Jan 26 2009, 10:33 PM

Hi All,

Glad to see the excellent discussion on 914 EV conversions. I've had my 914 EV for two years now and have really enjoyed it. The car uses older lead-acid technology and only has a 50 mile range. The performance is mediocre compared to the original. After fixing everything up and getting a new transmission, the total cost for everything was about $24,000.

It may seem like this was just a waste of time. On a more positive note, there is very little maintenance, no noise, and absolutely no emissions. Bicycles love it. I personally did the conversion because I wanted a cool car and be "green" at the same time. It was really an emotional decision and not a practical one.

After two years of hard driving and commuting, I'm probably going to sell the car since I just converted a Honda Civic to an EV that's far more practical and cost much less to convert (it has three times the acceleration too!).

You can see more at the following:
http://914ev.blogspot.com
http://www.evalbum.com/1137

The Civic conversion is off topic, but here's a link anyway for those who are interested.
http://civic-ev.blogspot.com

If you're seriously considering an EV conversion of a 914 and want some detailed answers, feel free to PM me, or join the 914EV GoogleGroup and start asking questions.

Cheers,
TimK

Posted by: ChrisNPDrider Jan 26 2009, 11:20 PM

BE THE CHANGE!

For those that wait until it is the "best decision" you will be content to be another sheep in the flock. Our country was founded by rebel risk takers and I hope I some day save enough $$$ to do an EV 914!

Right now, I'd rather keep the 914 as budget cafe racer and do an EV mini-pickup with batteries in the bed = simple fab, cheap, easy, done!

If you are the type of guy who will stop in Walmart and tell a woman how to raise her kids, then go ahead and say ONLY 1976 914s for EVs....if your that type it fits. Otherwise, if it's your car, you can do what you please to it

Unmolested stock 914s are getting more unique every day

Posted by: plymouth37 Jan 26 2009, 11:41 PM

If you are building an electric 914 it's gotta be as light as is possible, 76's are too heavy, go for a 70 or 71.

Posted by: sgomes Jan 27 2009, 07:51 AM

I'm another converter as some of you know. Why would you convert a 914 and put a chevy engine in it? Because it's fast? NOT. I can think of dozens of cars that would destroy such a conversion in a drag race or autocross. Because economical? HUH? Because....because...because....

I'll tell you why. Because it's unique, fun and something to do with the car you love. Converting a 914 to electric isn't going to save the world or wipe out a hundred years of pollution. If you want to argue about whether or not it is less polluting than the original car bring it on. You don't want to have that argument and it misses the point anyway.

The point is I love my electric 914. It was easy to convert. It is a blast to drive. It is a major conversation starter where ever I go.

As for the original premise of this thread I would say you should encourage converters to use '76 models to leave more of the older models available for the other gear-heads to convert. The electric converters will tell you that the '76 is heavier than the older models but I have no data to back that up. Mine is a '73 and had a destroyed engine and transmission.

Just my 2cents

Posted by: LarryR Jan 27 2009, 08:49 AM

I have done lots of research into EV conversions (It has been probably 2 years ago). I came to the conclusion back then that in order to do it the way I would want with the power and range I would want it would cost somewhere around 50K. So I just deemed it not an option. I wanted Telsa performance....

I think doing it to a 914 is kind of a mute point considering that the 914 must be one of the all time most converted cars on the planet. (chevy v8's, suby, tdi, I think I remember someone even putting a geo engine in one) I remember thinking that I would probably do a boxster if I ever converted a car to electric. This is for reasons stated before... more abundant, rust resistance, etc...

However, for now the wife and I both drive 40 mpg clean diesels. The new jetta TDI is only 22K and delivers pretty awesome economy. I figure we do need to make the shift to energy independence for a multitude of reasons ... global warming, smog, economy of the nation, on and on....

No one technology will address everyone's needs so I say bring on the diesels, hybrids, EV's etc... Yes I still have my jeep for towing and hauling.... However, I now drive it less than 500 miles a year.....

I have strayed a bit from the initial premise of this thread so I will go ahead and stop here....

Posted by: jrmole Jan 27 2009, 10:50 AM

Hi all,

I just got home from after dropping off my son at school - in my 1975 914 EV. I was actually moved to convert the car because I used to drive a Honda EV+ (a lesser known late-90's EV than the GM EV1). It was a great car, but after 4.5 years Honda cancelled the lease and crushed the car. I loved that car and would still be driving it if Honda had let me keep leasing it.

My original plan was to convert an early BMW Z3 - long front trunk with a heavy engine. The alternative was a 914 where I could buy a kit with most of the parts. I decided not to do the Z3 because 1) I would need to design my own battery boxes and 2) I would need to hack into the computer if I wanted to retain the anti-lock brakes, airbags, etc. After finishing the 914, none of these things scare me anymore.

Getting back to the original issue (using '76s for EV conversions). I understand the writer's point. I choose a '75 because it was the body I could find that had a crappy engine and was local. I've tried to make sure that the parts I pull get recycled into the 914 community - often giving away smaller items rather than trashing them. Honestly, if I could have found a 76, I would have used it. There were only two for sale around me during the few months I looked. One was completely restore - I couldn't tear that one apart. The other was a bucket of rust in the shape of a car. Oh well.

I went with a small AC motor. It is very efficient and expect I will have a 60ish mile range with golf cart batteries once I work out all the kinks in the battery monitoring system - keeping my drives under 30 miles until then. When these batteries die, I will probably bite the bullet and invest in lithium-ion (hope the price really starts dropping). That will drop the weight of the car back down to near stock and increase my range to about 100 miles. The downside of the little AC motor is that I don't have the torque I would like in a sports car. It does ok on flat ground (not far off the stock performance), but the 1,000 pounds of lead makes it struggle on the very steep hills near my house. ANother reason to get Lithium if I can afford it for the next battery pack.

I enjoy driving it and expect to keep tinkering with it for years. Is it practical? Sort of. I work 5 miles from home, so it will easily be my commuter car. I can use it for quick runs to the hardware store on the weekend (as long as what I am buying can fit in the passenger seat). Could it be my only car? No. Of course, a two seater is almost never a practical car, so I don't think my EV should have to meet that standard.

Finally, I power my car with part of the 4,000 Watts of solar panels on my roof. During the day, my meter spins backwards as I sell power to the electric company. At night, I buy it back (at an off-peak discount!) to charge the car. My panels make enough excess power to put 10,000 miles/year on the 914 and still not have to write a check for my electricity. Given that I was only driving the car that the 914 is "replacing" about 6,000 miles a year, this should be fine. I could add a plug-in hybrid (if they ever really come to market) and still not spend money on power.

Enjoy your cars! I do mine.

Posted by: Goge Jan 27 2009, 11:18 AM

Am I safe from ridicule on this board, since I chose a BMW 2002 to convert? Probably not... but it's a '76 to boot (couldn't get it to pass emissions here in Oregon when it still had an ICE). I considered (briefly) converting my 914 but couldn't convince myself to go there.

I have alot of work left to do on the 2002, all I am hoping is that it will take me 15 miles to work, charge all day, and get me back home at night. Lead-acid is my only option right now.

Why am I converting it? I've always been an early adopter and I think electric is the way to go for the future. I'd like to be able to say I had one before GM actually sold any! I'm not a tree-hugger, but I am an engineer and (of course since I'm on this forum) cars are a big hobby of mine. I think I'm really doing it just for the fun of it.

-TH

Posted by: Mark Henry Jan 27 2009, 07:50 PM

I've been watching this and although I applaud the green efforts I believe the money would be better spent on other areas. Example for the price I'd install a ground source heat pump in my house first.

EV is great but not yet practical for us in the northern states and Canada.

Posted by: PThompson509 Jan 27 2009, 10:20 PM

Hmm, well, if I *could* have found a '76 I would have converted it, but as you said, it is rare. However, I DID find a '75 that had a really sad engine and transmission (and of course, the usual rust).

Personally, I DON'T think it's a bad thing for people to know that '76 or later are good years for conversion. However, this information needs to make it out into the general public (rather than just the 914 world/club/whatever page). Most of the time, you have people like me (former 928, current 911) trying to find a good chassis to use. I asked the local experts for help, and concentrated on finding a relatively rust-free chassis.

Now as for the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) regarding batteries:
Lead-acid Batteries are almost completely recyclable, and actually generate less greenhouse gas than your gastank to manufacture. They are good for 3-5 years (in moderate climates, maybe less in the bloody cold climates, dunno, I live in San Diego and have to worry about roasting to death in summer). Yeah, they are heavy, but I also have upgraded the suspension to deal with that.

Electricity? I have solar panels. <soapbox> But ponder this - I can get electricity from just about ANY source - gas, coal, nuclear, solar, etc. Where can you get gasoline from? ONLY oil. </soapbox>

So, If you want to ask people to not use earlier versions, thats cool. Talk to the people that make the kits and ask them to mention that. Electro Automotive makes a good kit for the 914, and I'm sure that someone at Camp 914 also knows.

[EDIT] on second thought, don't deal with Electro Auto. They are a company that obviously hates their customers and doesn't deliver. Don't touch them or any of their product.

Cheers!
Peter

Posted by: sEEkEr Feb 4 2009, 06:27 PM

Excellent thread and some great mind on mind friction here...

I too have been researching elecric....Electro Automotive kit with 100 mph and 100 hr cycles would run about 15K today....

Not sure if I want to be cool for 15K right now.....

Posted by: charliew Feb 12 2009, 11:00 AM

I am interested and will one day take the jump but the battery situation will have to improve. The deal is right now to make your own diesel and use 90's diesels to run 130.00 diesel.

To make the 914 guys feel a little better check out the toyota powered 67 camaro here. www.evsmotors.com.

Posted by: jtg Mar 27 2011, 07:49 PM

My 2 cents:



147 mile range, 106 mph top speed, 0 to 60 in less that 10 sec, expected life of batteries = 500,000 miles.

That's what I feel you can do now and have a home made electric 914. Practical, easy, relatively inexpensive. A great way to take a car that would have probably gone to the junk yard and give it another 30 years or so.

Info on mine: http://evalbum.com/3439


It's just too fun to drive,

Jim

Posted by: rdauenhauer Mar 27 2011, 08:00 PM

So how much of the 20K were the batteries?

Posted by: jimtab Mar 27 2011, 08:25 PM

Personally I am not a fan of the hybrids as they exist now, I think clean diesel is more effective until such time as battery technology gets better, I would be more in favor of plug-in electric cars if the energy came from alternative sources(solar, etc.) but using "the grid"just moves the pollution away from your house to wherever the plant is located, not really a solution IMHO. I say if you like to convert cars and you own the car, do what you will and live with the results. I've seen good conversions, but I've seen terrible ones as well.....not my thing, I owned a 6-conversion and it was great but it led me to the "dark side".....

Posted by: flipb Mar 27 2011, 08:27 PM

I question the assumption that 914 EV's are necessarily acquired with the intention of converting.

If the engine in my '74 2.0 crapped out (and there's a possibility it may have), I'd be faced with the following choices:

• Engine rebuild
• Find/buy a replacement TIV
• Find/buy a Porsche 6
• Convert to EV

Sure, there are other options (Suby, SBC, etc.) but the ones above are the ones that I would personally consider.

The upside of EV for me - no engine maintenance, dependability (how often does your TV refuse to start?), cheap to operate, and most important: It would drastically cut both the cost and time of my daily commute. I could drive it daily, take the HOV lane, and get to work in 1/2 the time. I'd certainly put a lot more miles on my 914 if it were running on volts.

Posted by: r_towle Mar 27 2011, 08:46 PM

I bought a Prius...thing is cool and gets 50 mpg easy.
If you drive it just so, it gets 99 mpg.

Rich

Posted by: Root_Werks Mar 28 2011, 08:53 AM

Rick hit the nail on the head. The motors and controls are easily there, but batteries for the layman folks like us are not.

My 914 is close to 40mpg, very close and pretty much all stock. It would take hundreds of thousands of useful miles from batteries before I'd ever see a break even from a conversion.

Posted by: PThompson509 Mar 28 2011, 11:13 AM

All that is probably true for your car. <rant>How long do you think will take when gas reaches $5/gal? Or $6/gal? Those prices are coming. </rant>

That being said, you can get a nice battery pack for $8k (roughly) and a really nice motor (80kw) for $6.6k. When I started my conversion, I was guessing about $20k to $25k for parts. Now the price is from $15k to $20K, and will continue to drop.

Cheers,
Peter

Posted by: flipb Mar 28 2011, 02:47 PM

Question for those who've done it: Are there any Federal tax incentives for converting a 914 to fully electric?
http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/dccustkits.shtml#voltsporsche

Posted by: jtg Mar 29 2011, 08:20 AM

Here's some info that I think is true:

There's a federal tax incentive for conversions. About 10% credit on parts bought if I remember correctly.


PThompson is right. About 9k for top of the line Batteries, 2K for a motor (DC), 2k for a controller, 1-2K for a charger, 1K for a motor-transmission adapter plate. rdauenhauer: I spent 9K for batteries 14 months ago, they came from China. The rest of the conversion parts were USA made.


The Prius is nice but it derives all it's energy from gasoline. Mine is all electric and gets charged from local power company. My state gets 75% of it's power from clean natural gas or nuclear. Clean diesel is good but still petroleum dependent.

I agree with jimtab, hybrids are not the complete solution. Why have an gas engine in an electric powered car if you don't have to? I charge mine up about twice a week if I drive it every day. For those that have two cars, one could very easily be a battery powered electric. My 914 was the perfect car for me to convert.

Jim

Posted by: 9146986 Mar 29 2011, 09:33 AM

I've always liked the idea of electric cars.

The heck with T Boone Pickens, if you want to solve the electric vehicle problem, take the internal combustion engines away from NASCAR and make them run electric. The battery problem would be solved in about two seasons.

As far as the premise of using only '76 model 914's? Maybe a good idea on paper, but it's hard enough to find a good chassis, let alone limiting it to one year model.

Once you buy the car, it's yours to do as you please, be it V8, Subi, Porsche 6, electric, or JACK STANDS!

Posted by: SteveL Mar 29 2011, 11:28 AM

All this talk about electric cars saving the environment.
OK
Charge up that car.
Coal, Nuclear, Wind, Solar, Tidal.
Coal Electricity - look at the total impact of a mile driven, including charging hte car with a coal power plant. Bad idea.
Nuclear - see above, except think of waste disposal.
Wind, Solar, Tidal - this source is VERY expensive. Wind and solar are unreliable.
So, if you use them, your ability to drive is unreliable too. Also, Wind and Solar are NOT cost effective. It might seem like they are, but gov't subsidies (read tax dollars from everyone) is artificially losering the price. You are really paying a lot more for it, just some of it comes out of your paycheck directly.

Posted by: SteveL Mar 29 2011, 11:35 AM

Question -
When you drive a gas car - 20 MPG, at $4.00 per gallon = $.02 per mile.
When you drive an all electric car, what is the cost per mile? I get a bill every month from the electric utility, so I know it is not free. What does it cost to charge an electric car per mile driven?
How much if you use purely renewable energy sources (wind, solar, tidal) UNSUBSIDIZED. Yes, you have to figure in how much you would be charged in taxes as well as on your direct bill.

Thanks

Posted by: brp986s Mar 29 2011, 12:32 PM

There isn't a battery problem. The energy in the battery? That's the problem. Maybe Li-ion battery prices will come down some, but producing Li metal for a Li-ion is expensive not due to a technological issue, but the high energy required and that part won't going away.

Soon, I expect the subsidies will have to be yanked because the federal gov is broke and getting your neighbors to pay for your car isn't going to work. This will stack the odds against EVs even further.

Posted by: jrmole Mar 29 2011, 01:02 PM

Actually, 20 MPG @ $4.00 = $0.20 per mile, not $0.02 per mile.

My electric 914 uses between 3 & 4 miles per kWh. I charge off-peak and pay about $0.07 per kWh (varies between winter and summer). So that works out to about 2 cents per mile. One tenth the cost of gasoline.

I have a few thousand Watts of solar panels on my roof. During the day, I sell the surplus to the power company (who turns around and sells it to my neighbors). At night, I buy the power back. The net production of my panels is enough to completely cover my house and about the first 15,000 miles I drive per year.

I installed the panels a couple thousand Watts every couple years as I could afford them. The first set (2001) have long since paid for themselves. The most recent (2010) will take another few years to pay for themselves. Without the tax breaks, it would have added a couple more years, but would still be worth it. Solar hot water pays back even faster.

The conversion of the 914 will take many, many years to pay for itself. But who buys a 914 to save money? Can't believe anyone on this list would make that mistake.

I am just happy that I can drive around without sending money to places that don't like the United States very much, without sending CO2 into the air and without worrying about price increases in either oil or electricity.

Happy driving.

Posted by: Eric_Shea Mar 29 2011, 01:44 PM

I don't think you're figuring the cost of the batteries into your MPG or MPkW equation no?

How often do you need to change out the batteries?

How many charges will they take before they're gone?

How are they recycled?

And no... I'm not trying to be an asshole about this, I'd really like to know.

I did a little research and I felt the only thing holding me back from doing an electric conversion on a 914 for my daughters would be the batteries and battery technology. I thought one would have to buy about $3 grand worth of batteries every year.

Have things gotten better? Changed?

The other thing was 900lbs of batteries??

I'm really digging the idea that these cars would be ideal for such a conversion but those are the things that held me back from further exploration after giving it a cursory once over.

Posted by: r_towle Mar 29 2011, 03:01 PM

I was watching a discover channel program on batteries.
It happens to be the number 2 most recycled item on the planet.
Steel is number one btw.
They are broken down to the core elements and everything is recycled to make new batteries...

That takes one arguement off the table for me.

The issue I have with Lithium batteries is the core producer of the lithium is korea...so we will be trading one regional issue for another.

I do agree that these types of changes are monumental and almost as large as Gas versus horses back at the turn of the century.

We bought a prius because its a decent cheap car, and its 50% cheaper than a volvo to fill with gas...
Took my swedish wife out of her lifelong car brand and switched..
she loves the prius...loves the mpg, and loves the savings.

It would never have happened if it did not affect her wallet...her weekly gas budget.

We have a huge south facing barn and we are installing a fairly large grid of panels soon...140 feet by 40 feet to begin with.
That should support a few plug in hybrids as the years go on.

If and when I can build an elec car that will produce stunning speed, stunning acceleration, and go 200-300 miles between charges...I will do it.
Till then, IC hybrids as the next step...and a diesel hybrid Volvo is coming in two years...so we will switch back to volvo again.

Rich

Posted by: flipb Mar 29 2011, 03:25 PM

Why does every discussion about electric cars devolve into "but the electricity comes from coal/nuclear/blah/blah/blah!"????

Do you realize that every gallon of gas you pump into your car subsidizes the Saudi royal family, among others?

This isn't necessarily about choosing a car based on minimal overall carbon footprint, or "feel good about yourself" or anything else. It's a personal choice, just like buying any collector car.

Maybe I think the technology is cool.
Maybe I'm ready to give up on oil changes, valve adjustments, drips in my driveway, etc.
Heck, maybe driving an EV gives me access to HOV lanes and free parking.

We all own cars that are impractical and weren't selected based on cost of ownership, environmental impact, or anything else that can be quantified in a spreadsheet. Why does everyone think EVs have different criteria?

Posted by: jrmole Mar 29 2011, 03:46 PM

True. But I wasn't figuring the costs of oil changes, air filters, spark plugs, eventual engine overhauls, etc. into the cost of the gas engine per mile either. Of course, these are probably less per mile than the battery pack...



I drove my 914 a couple thousand miles with no change in performance. Unfortunately, the e-brake failed one day and it rolled out of the driveway and hit a tree across the street (no engine braking from an electric motor). The batteries were damaged as well as minor body damage. It's in the shop now waiting for a new paint job.

Other conversions seems to get ~15,000 miles per battery pack (lead acid). At ~$2k per pack, that adds $0.13 cents per mile. Certainly more than than the electricity. And comes close to leveling the playing field with a gasoline car per mile.



That really depends on the batteries, the chargers and how deeply you discharge them each cycle. The manufacture's data is often useless. The 15,000 miles per pack is a better measure, I think.



Just like car batteries. Supposedly lead is one of the most recycled product on the planet. It is sooo much cheaper to get lead out of old batteries than out of the ground that almost any battery you buy will be mostly made from old batteries.



Didn't come across as an asshole. I am glad to answer some questions.



Well, my pack was ~1,200 pounds. I had to beef up the suspension and added a full roll cage to help stiffen up the car. It handled great but struggled to get the weight up hills. As far as braking, my conversion had regenerative braking that would throw you against the seatbelt if you turned it up all the way - much better than the brakes on a stock 914.

Given my trouble with battery acid, and the dropping price of lithium batteries, I am going to switch to that when I get the car back from the shop. The pack and associated charging system will be about $10,000. This is down from almost $40,000 5 years ago (when I started on my conversion).

The lithiums are supposed to be good for ~150,000 miles, so that will drop the price of the batteries per mile to ~$0.07 or half what lead costs. I hope to get > 10 years on this pack without maintenance.

The new pack will drop ~850 pounds from the car and, since I am running at a higher voltage, give me more torque too. Looking forward to driving it.



This is no more a money saving project than doing a complete rebuild and swapping motors. If you want to drive cheap, buy a used mid-90's Honda Civic for a couple of grand. I used to own one that routinely gave me 45 MPG. Or buy an old motorcycle even cheaper and get even better mileage.

I am doing it because I think it is a fun project. Same reason I assume most 914 owners deal with the joys of a 40 year-old car. I just have a slightly different definition of fun than the people putting V8's into these cars.

Happy driving.

Posted by: Eric_Shea Mar 29 2011, 04:21 PM

Cool info.

Now, lets get that battery pack down to say $5k and I'm on it. We could have it fit where the gas tank was and, at around 350lbs (was I reading that right... You're going to shave 850lbs off with the new battery) that would be amazing. I had a 350lb girlfriend once... 914 handled it well

Glass hoods, glass body panels. Weight savings on the motor. We might be able to get this pig to weigh in at stock numbers!

I think its a cool technology to follow.

Posted by: Mike914 Mar 29 2011, 05:43 PM

My '74 has a glass bumper, it was easier to cut the charging port (hidden behind the front plate) than steel. I may swap out the lids when it's due for paint.

The price of batteries is driven by consumption. That's where Hybrids are helping, they consume a lot more batteries than would otherwise be used, and the cost gets lower the more sold.

One point:

Cold weather does not affect lithium as much as lead/acid, but those of you that drive in sub-zero temps probably already have a block heater to keep your ICE warm at night, lots of places up north have plugs outside stores that are free for shoppers. Same thing with batteries, just run the heater on high while charging to warm them up, and run it on low while driving to maintain the temps. Battery boxes are insulated...

I'm going with lead/acid for my first pack, to allow me to tweak the settings on the AC controller. When that set dies, I'll be looking at alternatives, which will be cheaper than they are today. Higher voltage will mean revamping all the settings, but I'll have done it before...

Posted by: smontanaro Mar 30 2011, 12:35 PM

A couple comments. Coal is bad, the worst. No doubt about it. Most states don't derive all their electricity from coal though.

I have no concrete evidence to prove my point, but I'm pretty sure we (the consumer) already subsidize the petroleum industry in many different ways. They just aren't as visible as those subsidies written as such by Congress. All those lobbyists for Big Oil must be doing something for their clients or they wouldn't stay in business.

Posted by: bernbomb914 Mar 30 2011, 03:04 PM

This is a great discussion but you have missed one product that is clean readly avalable and cheep and should be easy to convert. NATURAL GAS

Posted by: Mike914 Mar 30 2011, 03:26 PM

Still, it's not renewable.

"There's only so much oil (or gas) in the ground".

Tower Of Power

I can get all the electricity I need for driving from my solar panels.

There you go, solar, it's nuclear power at a safe distance!

Posted by: orange914 Jan 11 2012, 12:07 AM

Great thread. Amusing the heat this has brought up! Ha Eric your assholiness... Funny... I've always had an interest in the EV thing. Let me just say I don't nessasarily go out of my way to run over kittens but I'm not drawn to this because of the green thing, just like the idea, especially using solar panels.

I just picked up an older setup off a dunebuggy. I've got an 81 diesel rabbit pickup I'm weighing using (smog exempt). So I guess I'm looking for input to guide me on the viability of building this up. Seems most of the cost runs with the batteries.
jtq, thats one nice EV