is this someone from here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWPiUd9nMWA...ted&search=

Dunno who it is, but it is clearly the Electro Auto DC Voltsporsche kit: http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/kits.shtml#voltsporsche

you know, it's worth a discussion. but someone has to come across with cost per mile data or it's pointless.

youd think the guys marketing the kits would have this info... unless it makes no financial sense to do it and the only buyers are fanatics.

maybe the federal government could pony up tax credits if they where serious about weening drivers off fossil fuels.

$13,415.00!!!!

Now I'm all for saving the Earth and coming up with viable energy alternatives. But they have to make economic sense. I look at that price and break it down like this:

In year of average driving (10K miles on the P-car) I spend $1140 a year on gas. That's an average of 25 miles to the gallon at $2.85 a gallon. Given these numbers it would take over 11 years for the conversion to pay for itself. Take those numbers and factor in what it would cost daily to recharge the battery packs. Electricity isn't free here in Massachusetts I don't about anywhere else in the country.

Just my thoughts....

Mike D.

As I've said before in other threads you don't do this if you are looking to save money. I did a similar calculation - even at $5.00 per gallon, the $15,000 I've put into my conversion would buy 3,000 gallons of gas, which would go 60,000-75,000 miles. But the fun and challenge of the conversion plus the "neato" factor of the completed vehicle (fingers crossed) were sufficient reasons for me.

I don't recall who it was, but someone mentioned using an a/c conversion so the regenerative braking could help make up for weak brakes and added weight. Sounds like a reason for a 5-bolt conversion and ditching of the proportioning valve to me!

Yes, there is an AC kit as well as DC kit. The AC kit is rather new, with only a few cars up and running. It's really a tinkerer's dream. This is the kit that I'm using for my project: http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/ackits.shtml#ac914

Yeah, it's expensive. Plus, the cost of the kit does not include batteries. However, I have solar panels on my house, so the cost of electricity is "free". (I'm not counting the cost of the panels in the first place). Another bonus, is that I get to drive in the HOV lanes. This is a real plus in SoCal.

Cheers,
Peter

I have a vested interest in this as I am trying to restore a 914 for an electric conversion. My 2 cents:

The thing about these conversions is that I think they make financial sense even though the cost of the conversion is high. What you have to consider is that the kit (AC or DC) plus a 914 in decent- to-restored condition is comparable to a new car. I don't think of the kit price as having to be paid back by reduced operating costs. Looking at it this way, if you can put a kit in a 914 for even $15-20K aren't you paying LESS than a new two-seater? It gets better because the electric drivetrain is simple, bulletproof, and should last longer than you will. The motors for instance should go over a million miles with minimal maintenance (brushes if DC and nothing if AC). Entire systems (exhaust, ignition, fuel, lubrication, etc) don't exist so there has to be savings there. If you can keep the rest of the car maintained you have a car that costs the same-to-less to start and less through the years.

So, if you take the cost of the kit out of the picture the straight electric/gas comparison I figure goes roughly like this:

-The lead acid batteries used cost about $1400. They can be recharged about 550 times so $1400/550 = $2.54/cycle
-The batteries hold about 17.4kwh of electricity. At .15 kwh that's $2.61
$2.54 + $2.61 = $5.15 for about 60 miles of range (combined city/highway)
-$5.15/60miles = 8.6 cents/mile (electric)
-60 miles at 30mpg at $2.80/gal = $5.60
-$5.60/60miles = 9.3 cents/mile (gas)

The numbers used are estimates and things like charger efficiency are not factored in but they give me a sense that the economics are here now and that you can do something about the environmental mess we're in and be fiscally responsible too. Oh, and you get to drive around in a cool car!

Why would you expect a government run by former and future "oil men" to give a shit about saving fossil fuels...??

Don't mean to be negative but electric cars will not seriously reduce fossil fuel usage. That electricity has to be generated somehow and in North America most of that is with fossil fuel of some sort. The bonus in shifting cars over to electricity is that the generating plants have much better control over emissions than a car. But really - the grid could never keep up with electric cars if they were ever adopted in any great quantity.

People like Peter who have gone off the grid with their own solar panels are of course the exception to that rule. Hats off to him and others who are willing to make that committment.

I think that Electric 914s are way cool, and would even consider making one. My problem is with batteries. I hate loosing all of the trunk space to batteries. Also, the energy used to make and dispose of the batteries is more then the batteries will provide over the course of thier lifespan.

Still, batteries are becoming better and smaller. I could see me making something like this as a commuter vehicle in a few years.

Zach

I also am building the Electro Automotive AC kit: http://volt914.blogspot.com - and yes, regen braking was a big reason why (the idea of trying to stop an additional 1150 pounds of lead with standard 914 brakes gives me the willies).

Although I'm going with standard lead-acid right now, there are some new technologies "right around the corner" that might be worthwhile when I need to recycle the current set - see, for example, http://www.fireflyenergy.com/ for an innovative lead-acid concept.

TimK (at http://914ev.blogspot.com) is also doing the AC kit - his is, as far as I know, the first one on the road.

I know it doesn't seem like it but electric cars would reduce fossil fuel use in a number of ways. Electric motors convert about 90% of the energy put into them to mechanical energy. Lead acid batteries are about 75% efficient. Car engines convert about 15% of the energy in the gas so there's savings there. Yes, there is loss in power transmission but so is there energy "lost" in the transport of gas in the distribution network. Though fossil fuel is used to generate electricity, in the United States roughly 30% of the electricity comes from non-fossil sources (like nuclear and hydro). An electric car would (on average) get 70% of its energy from fossil sources where right now 100% of a gas car's energy comes from fossil sources. Oil in particular would be saved as only about 4% of electricity is produced by oil. As far as the grid keeping up with electric cars, they would mostly charge at night where there is a huge amount of unused capacity. One thing I read said that you could support 10 to 20 million electric cars without building 1 additional power plant. You're right that power plants can control emissions when they burn fossil fuel better than cars and there is even talk of building coal plants that sequester their carbon emissions in the ground so there will be no greenhouse gasses released.
Electric cars are not perfect (your trunk(s) will be filled with batteries) but they would reduce our use of fossil fuel particularly the one with the most strings attached: oil. As we bring more non-fossil or cleaner fossil sources online things automatically get better.

Until the perfection of fuel cells and super conductivity, the novelty of an electric 914 is futile unless one has more money than brains. I'd prefer a supercharged 928 fosil fuel burning beeehotch than an quasi ecocentric abortion.

yeah...I must concur with the above....10K minimum and no tax credit? I think not!

Let 914 wisdom shine!

AC is the way to go, but did you factor in the cost of a really long ass extention cord?

I did, but unfortunately the kit does not include an unwinding/winding component so I am having to fabricate one.

Hold up here ya high dollar homey, if you doin this, ya needs ta poss sum pics.

PJF,
Good analysis. You might be pushing some of the numbers a little bit but close enough.

The 10-20 million e-cars without a new power plant doesn't pass my personal 'reasonableness' test. They would have to be relying pretty heavily on a model where the cars are all being charged during the night when there is not as much stress on the grid.

Still think Peter has the only really green answer. Put up your own solar panels. Ontario has a pretty good system going. They will give you a 20 year contract to feed power into the grid from solar panels. The $/Kwh is much higher than what we buy electricity for - enough that you can finance the solar setup over the 20 years and it doesn't cost you anything. The thinking is that the cost of building a new power plant is more than buying solar energy from individuals even at an inflated price. Works pretty well since the grid hits it's peak during the daylight hours when the sun is there to produce extra power.

Again though, as much as I'd like to have one I don't think we are ready for large scale adoption of e-cars. Scares me a bit to think of the brake and suspension repercussions of carrying around an extra half ton all the time. Lead Acid will never do the trick well.

Thanks SWL. That sounds like one sweet solar panel deal you have up there. In the US the electric utilities have to be forced to buy the excess electricity from homes with solar panels. And they will only pay you what it costs them to produce it nevermind more than what a customer would pay.

Yes, lead acid batteries have their problems (like their weight) but hopefully better stuff is coming.

Exactly, nighttime the plants just coast along, so the is plenty of capacity for lots of slowly charging cars. No one ever factors in the added fuel to keep the plants running at the higher capacity though...



CAlifornia currently rebates about 30% of your costs for a solar install. (I got mine in last year when the entire amount came back in a lump sum, I hear now it only comes back to you once you produce power.) With the rebate , the payback time is about 20 years, assuming rates stay the same. (Any increase in rates will shorten the payback time.) We have a 3-tier rate system with the ON-PEAK rate, PART-PEAK rate and OFF-PEAK rates at different times of the day, and weekends and Holidays all OFF-PEAK. (Winter and Summer rates vary also.)
ON-PEAK corresponds to daylight hours when my panels are producing the most, so I sell power during the day at the highest rate, and consume at the lower rates when I'm home.

You can see my solar output @ http://view2.fatspaniel.net/FST/Portal/Sol...dAdminView.html




Purpose built E-Cars can do a LOT better than converted gas cars since they are designed from the git-go to handle the greater mass. Above 3-40 MPH, aerodynamics play a larger and larger part in the amount of energy need to move you, so a small, slippery shape is also a plus, not something you can do anything about on a conversion either. 914 is only so-so with it's cd of 3.18, but better than a bug or a truck! (Small pickups have the advantage though, already designed to carry extra mass and lots of room for batts!)

I have taken a different approach to converting my 914. I looked at the VoltsPorsche kit and decided it was too heavy, and the batteries were mounted too high. I can do without the range for now, so I will be using smaller 12V Gel batts, mounted as low as possible, and in approximately the same locations as the original motor and gas tank mass to try to keep the handling close to what I'm used to. I am only adding 400LBs in the rear and 200 in the front. Trade off is only 20 miles range. When batteries get better, I can always upgrade!

I looked at the ElectroAutomotive kit 10 years ago, and have seen a few conversions since, one thing that decided me was the regen in the AC kit. I drive my 914 with the throttle, and having a DC kit that did not slow the car down on lift just wouldn't work for me! So 22mm front bars and 165LB/in. rear springs should be just right, though I may want to go with a larger anti-sway bar (19mm now).
I have also upgraded the brakes, M in front with Mikey's hubs and V-Kits in the rear.

See my progress @ http://www.roadglue.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62

Hi Mike.
I have been following your thread on Roadglue with interest. Here you mention a 20 mile range. Is this 20 mile range less than lead acid batteries or are you estimating a 20 mile range per charge. This much effort for 20 miles would really scare me. What range are you expecting?

If that 20 mile range is with a 12 second 1/4 mile, I'm IN!

"I need a car that can go 200mph so I can get to work." -Bill Cosby

I calculated about 50 miles from full to flat.
20 miles is the range that will let the batteries get recharged at about 40% discharge. Running lead-acid flat all the time results in short life, so only expecting 20 miles is my way of keeping them from dieing too soon. As it is, I only drive 8 miles to work, where I can charge on 220, so the batteries should have a nice long life. "Opportunity" charging is also possible, the local Fry's has a 220 port, as do all the Costco's in this area. Popping into a store for 10 minutes could add 10-20 miles to my range with the PFC-20B putting out 30 Amps DC!

It's a fact that 80 or 90% of the cars on the road drive less than 40 miles a day, I have another 914 for the few times a year when I do need to go farther than this car will go, a rental would be another option...

Well It's going to be faster than the lead-sled EA kits!