EV Conversions

Modified FSJ Tech Area

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Alright, <hopefully> reviving this thread a little bit.

So I was thinking before, that with the EV conversion, I'd want purely regen brakes. It works just fine for trains; a 4000 lb Jeep shouldn't be a problem. Then you can eliminate the weight and added complexity of the hydraulic brakes. In the US, I don't think it's strictly legal on newer stuff; not sure how it would work with the older stuff as legality goes. I suspect it's pretty gray area, and then on top of that the odds that anybody's going to explicitly look for that when they pull you over seem low.

As I thought about this more though, if I went with the plan of keeping the D20 and putting a 3-on-the-tree in, this would cause a couple of MASSIVE safety problems.

Number one, in two wheel drive, only the rear tires would have any braking power, which is totally backwards from what you would want, if you're choosing one end to not have any brakes. This is actually the less concerning of the two.

Number two, if anything went wrong, and you wound up in N in a panic situation, no matter how much brake you tried to give it, it wouldn't actually slow you down any, because the motor(s) wouldn't be tied to any of the wheels.

So you COULD put a Qtrac/full time case in it, and run direct drive (2-speed reduction gear maybe?), but at that point, you're totally wasting power and energy, continuing to run the U joints and the driveshafts and all that fun stuff, and because you'd need the front locked in all the time, it would be incredibly inefficient. Not that it's going to be efficient with the aerodynamics of a barn door anyway, but it wouldn't be a great design, AND you'd have to worry about battery space, and protecting them, with that driveline there. I see two alternatives.

Number one, you could do a full IFS/IRS, and with the SJ platform and nothing there to go off of, you could do some nice long control arms, and coil overs, giving yourself both the flex of an FSJ and the handling of a fully independent car. The real disadvantages there are that it'd be a lot of custom and expensive work, and it wouldn't have any FSJ parts underneath anymore, so if you needed something, most likely it would be custom and hard to come by.

Number two, Dana might let you order some of these for a FSJ, I dunno. You could probably build your own with a D44/AMC 20 if you got ambitious.
http://www.danaelectrified.com/Products ... gid-e-Axle
Issues there are obviously large quantities of unsprung weight, and eventually, from being moved around with the suspension moving, I suspect those power wires would get worn out. Also ground clearance may be an issue; it's hard to tell in their listing.

I wonder if Jeep wants to retrofit the nee Wagoneer S stuff into an older one...it would be more Jeep than any other FSJ! It would be an all Jeep powertrain, with an all Jeep body. VS. the AMC or GM engine (ok the Tornado is Jeep), GM or Chrysler transmission, any number of manufacturers' t case, and Dana axles...
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

Yeller
Posts: 1521
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:54 am
Location: Rogers County Oklahoma

Re: EV Conversions

Post by Yeller »

I like your dreaming ambition.

having worked on some highly custom, very long travel 4x4 IFS stuff, hope ya got deep pockets...... that stuff is a whole other level of expensive.
The bus I ride is so short it is a yellow Smart Car full of squirrels, monkeys and clowns.

1970 J2500 Resto Mod
https://www.fsjnetwork.com/forum/viewt ... 12&t=21395

1974 Bronco “Broncno”
https://classicbroncos.com/forums/threa ... st-3411909

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Thanks lol

And thanks for the warning on the pricetags. I don't at this point but maybe by the time I'm ready for that...
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

Stuka
Site Admin
Posts: 11789
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:53 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: EV Conversions

Post by Stuka »

Regenerative brakes are great at slowing a vehicle down. However, they are incapable of holding a vehicle in place. Even trains have traditional brakes.

The Dana axle you linked is for Kei trucks. Not nearly wide enough for an FSJ.

An independent system could work fine. It doesn't need to be baja ready. It would not be hard to adapt a GM torsion bar system, and then use center mounted electric motors. This is how all current electric vehicles do it.
2017 JKU Rubicon
Pevious Jeeps: 1981 J10, 1975 Cherokee, 2008 JK, 2005 KJ, 1989 XJ

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Then why is it labeled as for commercial use, and advertised on the back of a Ram van in the catalogue?

If the regen doesn't hold it back it shouldn't matter; the electric motors won't be putting power down trying to pull it forward, and on a hill the regen will keep it from rolling. I've tried it with my R/C stuff. The only issue I can see is if it's so icy that the motor can't hold it back from sliding. But how is that really any different from mechanical brakes?

The other thing about regen is it's a piece of cake to put ABS in.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

Stuka
Site Admin
Posts: 11789
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:53 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: EV Conversions

Post by Stuka »

sierrablue wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:31 pm Then why is it labeled as for commercial use, and advertised on the back of a Ram van in the catalogue?

If the regen doesn't hold it back it shouldn't matter; the electric motors won't be putting power down trying to pull it forward, and on a hill the regen will keep it from rolling. I've tried it with my R/C stuff.
Kei trucks are pretty much only used for commercial applications. If you look, the one you linked says its available with an M180 or M190 differential. A Wrangler for instance uses an M220 for the rear axle. Which is equivalent to a Dana 44. An M186 for instance is a Dana 30 (used in the front of a Wrangler Sport). A 180 is roughly equivalent to a Dana 27, and the 190 is a Dana 35 (Used in the front of a new Bronco).

Dana does offer a variety of E-Axle configs. I am sure they offer larger ones than the eS4500r. And they would be the easier to adapt to our vehicles as you can basically bolt them in.

R/C stuff doesn't transfer to full size vehicles because of the mass differences. A 1:10 scale RC may scale the length and width, but it doesn't scale the mass. They are incredibly light compared to what a scaled down Wagoneer would weigh.

Regen only is able to work if the motor is turning. Even the best electric vehicles cannot regen a car to complete stop, only down to about 1-2mph depending on the gear reduction. Now if the vehicle is geared really low, you could probably get that speed down a bit more. But kind of a moot point as you are required by law to have mechanical brakes. Oh, and if the battery is full, regen doesn't work as it requires the current draw to slow the motor down. So if you are driving down a very long hill with a pretty full battery, its going to be a wild ride.
2017 JKU Rubicon
Pevious Jeeps: 1981 J10, 1975 Cherokee, 2008 JK, 2005 KJ, 1989 XJ

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

Stuka
Site Admin
Posts: 11789
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:53 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: EV Conversions

Post by Stuka »

That ones on the opposite side of the spectrum. Class 4-6 are big rigs. That one has a GVW of 10 tons.

They don't seem to have one for 1/2 ton trucks, which would fit our stuff. They have the eS5700r, which is intended for like an F350 with a 13K lbs GVW.

Some of their photos and marketing speak says the eS4500r is intended for pickup trucks, and they show a CGI F150 with one (though the lightning is IRS). But then their specs show that it would be really inadequate with a 7.5" ring gear, while the F150 has an 8.8" base, and a 9.75" for the higher tow rating models. Even the Ranger uses a Ford 8.8.

I am sure a lot more information and products will be coming out over the next few years. And I think once these products are actually put into a vehicle, we will have a better idea as to their use cases.
2017 JKU Rubicon
Pevious Jeeps: 1981 J10, 1975 Cherokee, 2008 JK, 2005 KJ, 1989 XJ

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

I think they'll be fine for a Wagoneer/Cherokee, and maybe a J10 (assuming you can get them wide enough), although it would have to be pretty stock. Maybe I'm wrong though.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

devildog80
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2022 2:41 pm
Location: Apache Junction AZ

Re: EV Conversions

Post by devildog80 »

Not sure but might have shared this Jeep Forum link before?

Very interesting read, and makes burning gas look so much more appealing with these older rigs......to me!

Sierrablue, when you get to CA for school, you can go help this guy on the weekends?

Thread for converting my 1984 Jeep CJ-7 ICE to full electric conversion.
https://www.jeepforum.com/threads/jeep- ... t-41583599
'81 CJ5 Base, 258 I6, MC2100, T176 4 spd, 300 TC, D30 Front NT, 3.31, 2-Piece AMC 20 rear NT, 3.31, 4" high arc spring lift
'84 Grand Wagoneer, 401 V8 (.030 over), MC2150 HA Comp, 727 auto, Selec-trac NP229, AMC 20 REAR - D44 FRONT - WT 3.31, 4" high arc spring lift
Rather be driving, than waiting to be modified

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Definitely an interesting read. I think his big issue is keeping the stock Jeep drivetrain. As everyone here knows, that drivetrain isn't especially efficient. Another issue with his build is that because it's a CJ7, and he kept the tcase and everything, there wasn't really room for enough batteries.

You can build a really good all-terrain EV, but you have to be willing to accept the fact that the stock drivetrain is not the way to do it. Batteries have way less energy than gasoline, so you have to use that energy as efficiently as possible (if you want the range and everything).

Also I plan to (hopefully, I'm not committed yet) go to school out in CO, not CA.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

devildog80
Posts: 1070
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2022 2:41 pm
Location: Apache Junction AZ

Re: EV Conversions

Post by devildog80 »

He is keeping the stock drive train, to maintain better off road capabilities, from what I understand.

Trying to build a kit for those who want to convert.

And seems to have more than enough room for batteries.

I misread your college plans. Thought you said CA.

Yep, from MN to CO won't be such a shock.

I grew up in ND, went USMC training ('80) and first duty station in CA, and I tell you that was an eye opener at 19 yrs old.

Holy Moly!!!!
'81 CJ5 Base, 258 I6, MC2100, T176 4 spd, 300 TC, D30 Front NT, 3.31, 2-Piece AMC 20 rear NT, 3.31, 4" high arc spring lift
'84 Grand Wagoneer, 401 V8 (.030 over), MC2150 HA Comp, 727 auto, Selec-trac NP229, AMC 20 REAR - D44 FRONT - WT 3.31, 4" high arc spring lift
Rather be driving, than waiting to be modified
User avatar

thej10guy
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2022 10:06 am
Location: Holmen Wisconsin 54636

EV Conversions

Post by thej10guy »

Ok not exactly what this thread is about but thank you for your service @devildog80!

That cj ev build is pretty cool and interesting. I wonder what other sort of stuff that dude has done that led him to build it…whether he had a background in electrical side of things or is just pursuing a cleaner vehicle. Either way, it’s cool!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1983 Jeep J10 Honcho SWB 5.3 4l60E NP241C viewtopic.php?f=12&t=22361
1979 Jeep J10 LWB (project/parts truck)
1989 GMC Jimmy (project)
Jeep Lover for life :fsj:

SJohn
Vendor
Posts: 283
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:10 pm

Re: EV Conversions

Post by SJohn »

I skimmed that CJ EV swap thread but the notable thing I noticed was someone brought up the new 4XE. That made me think that would be a great body swap candidate for those that want a hybrid FSJ. Of course if you could ever find and afford a suitable wrecked 4XE for the swap.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

Owner/Operator/Chief Engineer of Johnson Production FSJ Parts
https://www.johnsonproductionjp.com/

1986 J20 LS Swap
https://www.fsjnetwork.com/forum/viewto ... 12&t=17875

1981 Cherokee Chief - Rustard - 2JZ swap
https://www.fsjnetwork.com/forum/viewto ... 12&t=22981

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

SJohn wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:51 pm I skimmed that CJ EV swap thread but the notable thing I noticed was someone brought up the new 4XE. That made me think that would be a great body swap candidate for those that want a hybrid FSJ. Of course if you could ever find and afford a suitable wrecked 4XE for the swap.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
Yeah, that's true. I've been kind of hoping/dreaming that Jeep would want to put their new Wagoneer S drivetrain in an old Wagoneer. I like the full electric over the hybrid.

Although on the flip side, I could probably get a 1L diesel and get 50+mpg running it as a generator.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

thej10guy wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 3:09 pm Ok not exactly what this thread is about but thank you for your service @devildog80!

That cj ev build is pretty cool and interesting. I wonder what other sort of stuff that dude has done that led him to build it…whether he had a background in electrical side of things or is just pursuing a cleaner vehicle. Either way, it’s cool!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ditto.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Doing some more research, learning more about all the various options, thought I'd post some more info here.

Number one, before anybody talks about the "There's this car and it runs on water, man!" HHO conversion stuff, this is what it really is. It doesn't actually help, contrary to a lot of the hype. "It plugs right into the PCV" is a load of crap; it doesn't magically change anything.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a3499/4276846/

Number two, I've started having fuel cell electric cars grow on me a lot. The primary solution for this is hydrogen, which I initially had some massive qualms about. I mean, extremely explosive fluid, AND it's pressurized? That's just asking for trouble, right? Well they design the tanks to the point that it takes top-end military equipment to penetrate the walls of those tanks. I'm still a little bit concerned about the lines and such, but they only produce water, and have electric motors. They also have better range and such than a battery electric setup. Now we just need fueling outside of Cali...

Number three, there's new Lithium battery technology, which solves the fires, improves extreme temperature capabilities, and improves range by about 20% in normal conditions. Personally, I think this will be a massive improvement, and good for sports cars, sedans, and commuters. I just don't think it's nec. the best setup for extreme temps, and heavy/inefficient, old school equipment. It's also very heavy, especially compared to hydrogen, which would improve payload on trucks and such.

These are just my thoughts as I've been doing more research/learning.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
User avatar

Stuka
Site Admin
Posts: 11789
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:53 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: EV Conversions

Post by Stuka »

Solid state batteries are going to be a huge game changer once they start shipping in cars. Ambient temperature has way less impact on them, they don't burst into flames if punctured, they can be charged significantly faster, and they last longer.

The downside is currently, they are going to be more expensive. Though that may change with scale. And if the batteries last longer, and are easier to recycle, it becomes less of an issue.

What solid state batteries will do is make todays electric vehicles seem archaic. Internal combustion engine cars have been in production for 120+ years. We are currently in the model T stage for electric vehicles. At that stage for ICE cars, a horse and buggy was technically superior. A horse and buggy was more reliable, better range, WAY cheaper, and you didn't have to find a then rare fueling station. Many of the same downsides electric vehicles have now (minus the reliability bit).
2017 JKU Rubicon
Pevious Jeeps: 1981 J10, 1975 Cherokee, 2008 JK, 2005 KJ, 1989 XJ
User avatar

tgreese
Posts: 7118
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:31 am
Location: Medford MA USA

Re: EV Conversions

Post by tgreese »

As I see it, EVs will go one of two ways. They will either become widely accepted as a replacement for ICEs, or they will again be out-competed by some new technology, like hydrogen fuel cells. Also, ICEs could outcomplete EVs in the future when combined with CCS and/or carbon sequestration.
Tim Reese
Maine beekeeper's truck: '77 J10 LWB, 258/T15/D20/3.54 bone stock, low options (delete radio), PS/PDB, hubcaps.
Browless and proud: '82 J20 360/T18/NP208/3.73, Destination A/Ts, 7600 GVWR
Copper Polly: '75 CJ-6, 304/T15, PS, BFG KM2s, soft top
GTI without the badges: '95 VW Golf Sport 2000cc 2D
Dual Everything: '15 Chryco Jeep Cherokee KL Trailhawk, ECO Green
Blockchain the vote.

Topic author
sierrablue
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:02 pm
Location: MN/CO

Re: EV Conversions

Post by sierrablue »

Stuka wrote: Sun Apr 16, 2023 8:29 pm Solid state batteries are going to be a huge game changer once they start shipping in cars. Ambient temperature has way less impact on them, they don't burst into flames if punctured, they can be charged significantly faster, and they last longer.

The downside is currently, they are going to be more expensive. Though that may change with scale. And if the batteries last longer, and are easier to recycle, it becomes less of an issue.

What solid state batteries will do is make todays electric vehicles seem archaic. Internal combustion engine cars have been in production for 120+ years. We are currently in the model T stage for electric vehicles. At that stage for ICE cars, a horse and buggy was technically superior. A horse and buggy was more reliable, better range, WAY cheaper, and you didn't have to find a then rare fueling station. Many of the same downsides electric vehicles have now (minus the reliability bit).
A team in Europe came up with a solution to the "spontaneous flames", and temp changes, plus an additional 20% range out of the same batteries by simply changing the formulation of the gel/fluid in the Li-Ion batteries; companies can simply make a slight modification to the fluid and pump that into the existing batteries and fix most of the existing problems with Li-Ion.

I would argue that they're not at all at the Model T stage. It's similar as in people are awful at getting the infrastructure together, but SO many of the other poor aspects of the Model Ts aren't a problem. It's not anywhere near a fair comparison.

I think all of the technology is there; it's just too expensive for the general public at the moment.
'71 Wagoneer (DD)
-B350 (HEI, iron 4-barrel, Edelbrock 1406), TH400, D20
-'74 D44 front (nonpower discs)
-custom headliner
-Front shoulder belts (rears eventually)

viewtopic.php?t=23070

There are 2 major differences between new Wranglers and FSJs. FSJs are meant to be both utilitarian and capable, not just capable. FSJs are also rarely initially recognized as Jeeps by the average American.
Post Reply