How Will Electric Vehicles Be Modified in the Future?

[furcifer]

You obviously don't understand the "tuning game", then. If it can be made faster people will do it.

Nope. You watch too many movies. Hardly anyone runs NOS.

You're nitpicking now. The Chiron is obviously an extremely expensive limited production car. But there is an aftermarket for the
Ferrari 458, McLaren 720s, Lamborghini Huracan, etc, all of which do 0-60 in under 3 seconds. Use Google.

Again, you seem to watch too many movies and rap videos. If you want performance on a super car you pay for it from the factory. Aftermarket mods on a super car would junk it. STOCK.

You said failsafe. That's a failsafe.

Dude, go back and read for comprehension. I said "THEY" aren't fail safes. I was referring to something specific and not just random fail safes. Seriously, go look.

It's not really speculation when it's already happening. The speculation here is how it will be done in the future.

*sigh there's no right or wrong when we are speculating about how things will be done in the future. There's just logical arguments like mine, and irrational and unsupported ones like yours. :lol:

"Be careful?" Am I supposed to be scared? I'm only looking to get information on a topic that interests me. What's wrong with that?

lol, no. I meant don't act like you haven't heard this all before. You're acting like because you posted it here the answers you would get would be different.
In fact the opposite is true. I think a lot of people on this forum are under the impression the automotive industry is going to run a lot like some factory in China. It's not. If there's potential to be utilized in an EV the manufacturers will most likely utilize most of it, like Tesla is doing, rendering the aftermarket performance hobby a thing of the past.

It's not going to be the same thing at all. You're trying to apply a lateral thinking in a transition from ICE's to EV's and this is simply a very bad way of thinking. In my opinion.

Just clarifying. And if that were true, people wouldn't be using salvaged Tesla/Volt/Soul modules. So, again, wrong.

They're buying them as replacements, not as performance mods. You might think this is the same thing but it isn't.

Nonsense. The new Tesla batteries are more expensive than the originals. Look it up.

Yeah no kidding. A brand new battery is more expensive than a battery of an older car? Shocking. But overall, the price of lithium ion batteries have been dropping. https://www.iflscience.com/technology/battery-costs-drop-even-faster-electric-car-sales-continue-rise/

Well if you read what I wrote for comprehension you wouldn't be making up this strawman. I hate when people don't read and come back with something totally irrelevant and completely obvious. Everyone knows the cost of lithum ion cells is coming down.

PEOPLE WANT MORE CAPACITY, UNTIL THAT DEMAND PLATEAUS THE COST OF EV BATTERIES WILL CONTINUE TO RISE.

I would say there is room for discussion on this point. At some point people, say 500 miles of range, people will probably stop demanding more and the cost will start going down. But then are concerns about the availability of raw materials. I think it's hard to say much beyond the next 5-10 years.

Nice gate-keeping. If I somehow took the motor out of a Nissan Leaf and replaced it with a Tesla motor, then that would improve the performance. If I somehow got my hands on Rimac motors and put them in a Tesla, the Tesla would be more powerful. Just like if you took the engine out a Miata and dropped a Hellcat engine in it (like someone recently did), it would make the car faster. It's pretty simple. Replacing a motor with a more powerful motor makes the car more powerful. Very simple.

Good Luck fitting it in there. :lol:

I keep telling you this, it's only simple, in theory, and if you compare it to an ICE.

The whole purpose of this thread is to speculate about FUTURE modifications. Of course there isn't much of a market yet because 99% of vehicles are still ICEs. Electric cars (in their current form) have only been around for about 2 decades or so and are still limited in numbers. I thought this was pretty obvious but I gave you too much credit.

Perhaps you did give me too much credit. I'm basing my opinion on what we know about EV's, you want opinions based on how you think past and current ICE modifications will influence EV modifications. But they won't, at least based on the actual evidence we have on hand today.

Weren't you the same person who said that electric cars are going to keep getting better? Technology will improve. But even using modern technology, it's possible to improve the performance of an electric car. Not every electric car is fitted with the most powerful electric motor possible, just like we don't put 500 horsepower engines in commuter cars.

That's actually what I said 10 pages ago. Cars won't be fitted with motors that aren't utilizing most of their potential. Only the ones that aren't utilizing their full potential would be desirable for tuning. As those diminish to zero, in the same fashion as we are seeing out of Tesla, so will the performance modification market, at least as they pertain to power mods. The market will likely shift towards weight reduction and drag reduction, performance gains through efficiency.

Will people try to get more power, possibly. But they will most likely fail spectacularly and become a very tiny portion of the modifications being done to EV's.

On top of that, most motors can take way more power than they are provided assuming the rest of the powertrain can handle it and stay cool. If you replaced the controller, battery, inverters, whatever, of a Tesla and then upgraded the cooling system, you would have a more powerful car (that's what people have been doing with Zero motorcycles). Hell, even the Model 3 Performance and the Model 3 Long Range use the same powertrain, the only difference being software, cooling, and brakes.

Yah, that's basically what I'm saying. I think where we differ is you think it's feasible and I don't. People don't buy the Pontiac and then buy half a Cadillac to put into the Pontiac, they just buy the Cadillac.

My opinion is based on the cost. If people could do these modifications for $300 a pop, every few weeks, maybe. But the way EV's are being made makes it much more costly. A manufacturer would have to doing something completely different from what Tesla is currently doing and I just don't see that happening for a very long time, if ever.

Out of how many electric cars currently in production, how many of them are fast?

All of them but the crappy ones. A couple KIA's, the Hyundai, the Nissan and possibly the VW.

I think the question is if tuners have all this money and don't care about warranties and whatnot where are all these tuned Leaf's and such?

Not everybody is competing in the high performance luxury sedan market. Not everyone is building an electric performance car.

If the car isn't a performance car then it can't be tuned. That's the nature of the EV business.

Yeah, and the tradition of modding is continuing on to EVs.

Absolutely, it just won't have anything to do with power modifications.


All good stuff in this thread. I have to do a capstone project this year and I'm considering this as a starting point. It's worth looking in to further I think.

 

[Punx0r]

Well you certainly are a prolific poster...

You clearly don't understand what the allowable load and ultimate load are. Or what a design failure point is.

Actually I do. You don't seem to understand that the difference between the two is what reduces the incidence of premature failure of the part. You seem to think the difference is untapped performance potential that can be unlocked in software settings that will have no negative consequences.

Or what a clutch does. A clutch is specifically designed to transmit power from the engine to the transmission to prevent the failure of both. Trying driving a car without a clutch and see how long your drive train lasts!

That is like saying the purpose of the starter motor is to prevent cracking the rear windscreen because if you didn't have a starter you'd have to keep push-starting the car. Any protection a clutch affords the drivetrain is incidental. We'd be here a very long time listing examples of gearboxes, diffs, engines and driveshafts that gave out before the clutch did.

And I never said anything about how long parts last anyways. Are you even reading what I wrote? I said if the allowable limit is 1000N.m and the factor of safety is 10, then the ultimate strength, the amount of torque a part can sustain before failure is 10 000N.m

No, big difference: the NOMINAL failure point is 10,000Nm. The FoS exists because the real-world failure point of any given part may be much less. This is why you're wrong when you insist ludicrous mode can simply be programmed in on standard hardware to reliably utilise this, say, 10x overload capacity.

You're not making sense. This is a physical property of the material. The factor of safety doesn't have anything to do with life span. Not directly. If a part has a factor of safety of 2, the same part with a factor of safety 10 won't last 5 times as long. It's 5 times as strong.

No, it's unlikely to last 5x longer because that implies a linear relationship, which is unlikely. But if the part is used and loaded as intended then one with a greater FoS will perform for longer, which equals reliability, because it's over-built. The mean failure point of the population of parts will be more standard deviations from the minimum expected service life.

Strength and durability aren't synonyms. I'm not sure where you got this misconception. Perhaps from advertising? There is some relationship between the two, but it's not how things are designed. Wear and durability are separate considerations. You can think of it this way, an engine with a factor of safety of 3 won't last 100 miles without oil, but one with a factor of safety of 2 could last 1 000 000 miles with oil.

Strength and durability are strongly related. The definition of strength is the ability of a material to withstand the forces placed on it. It cannot be durable if it cannot do this reliably. As for running an engine without oil, as I said above "used and loaded as intended". Running without oil is abuse and outside the design scope.

And so what if Tesla had problems with gear reductions. What does that have to do with tuning or the price of tea in China???

Because I said you can't just turn up the wick on an EV 'cos potential mechanical failures and you said:

It doesn't seem very obvious to you that's because the mechanical system has a factor of safety well in excess of the electrical.

and

There's no argument that this isn't "good" for a vehicle. But saying it can't or won't be done is laughable. Tesla's proving that. And the weak point in the system is not the drive train, it's the battery and traction motors.

So me pointing out that Tesla actually had problems with early mechanical failure in the drivetrain, not battery and motor failures kinda blows your argument out of the water.

Oh, and I have way more experience with FMEA, albeit more to do with process than a specific part.

Maybe put down that Excel template and go take a walk to talk to the test lab or warranty engineers about what really happens when components are overloaded :wink:

Still, what all of this boils down to is me telling you why Tesla can offer the ludicrous mode to customers, and you giving me a bunch of reasons why they can't! It's pretty clear who is wrong.

I'm not arguing ludicrous mode on a Tesla doesn't exist. That's a silly argument. What's actually going on is you're arguing that any EV manufacturer can add the equivalent of a ludicrous mode at no cost, efficiency, weight or reliability penalty and this is just wrong.

 

[furcifer]

Actually I do. You don't seem to understand that the difference between the two is what reduces the incidence of premature failure of the part. You seem to think the difference is untapped performance potential that can be unlocked in software settings that will have no negative consequences.

*sigh

The Ambassador Bridge was built in 1927 and connects Canada and the US by the way of the cities of Windsor and Detroit. Since it's construction it's become on of the busiest border crossings in the World. It was designed with a factor of safety of 5 and was designed to carry cars, street cars, trucks and pedestrians. Today it's common to see loaded tractor trailers bumper to bumper in both directions for days on end.

IT HASN'T FAILED.

Sure there's more wear and tear on it, but it hasn't failed. It won't ever fail, because it's built with a factor of safety of 5. The traffic flow and weight it carries every day has increased more than 10 fold, but it hasn't failed. It can't fail because it will never be stressed beyond it's ultimate design strength.

It would take an act of God to do so. Perhaps if it were loaded and in the wind and hit by an earthquake. But it won't fail under normal use, including the massive increase in traffic over the last 100 years.

The factor of safety has nothing to do with wear and tear. Or premature failure. If it were loaded, in the wind and an earth quake hit in 1930 it may have failed just the same as if it happened today. What the factor of safety protects from is unforeseen combinations of stresses, accidents. Defects in materials, fire, snow, earth quakes etc. not more cars and trucks.

The same goes for a vehicles drive train. The increase in power through modification is very small in relation to the allowable design and ultimate strength. If it wasn't, a normal car wouldn't survive the occasional pot hole or curb it encounters regardless of when it happens during the lifespan of the car.

I don't know why you are confusing the two. Do you think Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to live to be the oldest man in the world? I hope not, because strength has nothing to do with longevity and it's really dumb to confuse the two things. But yes, in the unlikely event he and I were pinned under 500lb beams in a fire he might be able to bench press himself out whereas I would probably die.

That is like saying the purpose of the starter motor is to prevent cracking the rear windscreen because if you didn't have a starter you'd have to keep push-starting the car. Any protection a clutch affords the drivetrain is incidental. We'd be here a very long time listing examples of gearboxes, diffs, engines and driveshafts that gave out before the clutch did.

Only if the windscreen were between the starter and the engine and designed to transmit the power between the two. The clutch is a design failure point, a "sacrificial part".

No, big difference: the NOMINAL failure point is 10,000Nm.

What? What's a nominal failure point, I've never heard of this. If the allowable is 1000Nm and the FoS is 10 the ultimate strength is 10000Nm. If you load it to 9500Nm it won't fail, but if you load it to 10500Nm it will fail. If it breaks any sooner you have defective materials or poor design.

The FoS exists because the real-world failure point of any given part may be much less. This is why you're wrong when you insist ludicrous mode can simply be programmed in on standard hardware to reliably utilise this, say, 10x overload capacity.

BS. You don't know what you are talking about. You need to stop this particular avenue of discussion and do some reading.

No, it's unlikely to last 5x longer because that implies a linear relationship, which is unlikely. But if the part is used and loaded as intended then one with a greater FoS will perform for longer, which equals reliability, because it's over-built. The mean failure point of the population of parts will be more standard deviations from the minimum expected service life.

The increase in power is linear. You're not making sense. Do you think it's exponential???

Ultimate strength and service life are two separate things. I don't know where you get this notion you can test the ultimate strength of parts to determine service life. A chair built with a factor of safety of 2 lasts just as long as a chair built with a factor of safety of 20, so long as both are used for what they are designed for.

In fact parts "overbuilt" may have a shorter service life. Or at least shorten the service life of another part in the system by creating additional stresses that serve no purpose. A chair built with a factor of safety of 20 might not last as long as a chair built with a FoS of 2 if it gets banged around or the building around it crumbles under the weight of it's enormous mass. But nobody builds chairs with a FoS of 20 so they last longer.

Strength and durability are strongly related.

Nope.

The definition of strength is the ability of a material to withstand the forces placed on it.

Which has nothing to do with durability.

I would strongly suggest you think about this logically, just for a second. If I build a frame designed to hold 1000lbs, and I load it with 1000lbs. HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I load it with 50lbs. HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I load it with 1lb HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I don't load it at all HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If you derive some relationship between the allowable design, the load and the durability you should win a Nobel Prize.

It cannot be durable if it cannot do this reliably.

Please tell us how the durability is related to strength in the above scenario.

As for running an engine without oil, as I said above "used and loaded as intended". Running without oil is abuse and outside the design scope.

Fine, then run it with no oil pressure.

Because I said you can't just turn up the wick on an EV 'cos potential mechanical failures an
So me pointing out that Tesla actually had problems with early mechanical failure in the drivetrain, not battery and motor failures kinda blows your argument out of the water.

lol, so you're saying design flaws are the weak point? I would tend to agree. It has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

I'm not arguing ludicrous mode on a Tesla doesn't exist. That's a silly argument. What's actually going on is you're arguing that any EV manufacturer can add the equivalent of a ludicrous mode at no cost, efficiency, weight or reliability penalty and this is just wrong.

Oh, well then you're whole argument is a mistake then. There should be a minimal cost, a loss in efficiency and a slight penalty in reliability. Duh.
My argument is that not offering ludicrous mode is going to put any manufacturer at a disadvantage and cut sales revenue, which makes absolutely no sense. To the factory, the cost is minimal, the efficiency isn't their concern and the loss of reliability be customers choosing to engage said modes is a benefit to the bottom line. Duh.


eta: yes, I'm off for two weeks. I'm going to try and build a bike stand so I can do some repairs on my ebike, probably with a factor of safety of 1.5. How long do you think it will last?

 

[furcifer]

So let's look at another opinion...

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/25229...f-the-future-present-a-host-of-new-challenges

“Working with high voltage electrical systems in modern EVs can be very dangerous, with potentially deadly consequences if certain service procedures are not followed precisely,”

Audi Engineer-

“You can’t just boost the turbos anymore or put in new gear ratios. They have to be fit precisely to the right battery and the electronics of the motor itself, and all the thermal management systems factor in, as well. It’s nearly impossible to tune this system because it’s really, really complicated.”

"The resulting systems work much faster and in complete harmony with each other—and are in fact already engineered to maximize performance as much as possible."

Head of performance tuning company in LA-

“It is going to be tricky, because there’s not a lot you can do with a stock system and not many ways you can soup up an electric motor,” he said. “But you can reduce weight to help with braking, handling, and acceleration, and you can change the gear ratios and other parameters, and use higher performance tires for better acceleration and handling.”

Jaguar Engineer-

"You are governed by the laws of physics, of course—cable sizes, cell characteristics—but you have the flexibility to chip away at the parameter you want to sacrifice, whether its durability, reliability, or something else. Hardware modification will be harder, he adds, noting that electric vehicles are engineered very tightly to maximize interior space—but even there, “everything seems to be getting smaller,” so a creative tuner could in the future swap in new or more powerful or more efficient components that will do more with the space originally allotted in the vehicle."

Not surprisingly this is basically exactly what I was saying. The one thing that stand out to me in that article is the addition of hub motors on a Civic R type. It's possible that less expensive models like the Leaf won't come with AWD and adding hub motors to the non-driven wheels seems relatively straightforward. This seems like a very good way to modify and EV for performance that I had over looked. If AWD versions of the same car exist, then all bets are off. It seems like it would probably be easier and cheaper to salvage traction motors and upgrade to the AWD version. It's still a performance mod and a lateral move tuners do go for.

 

[SquidBonez]

Nope. You watch too many movies. Hardly anyone runs NOS.

Who was talking about NOS?

Again, you seem to watch too many movies and rap videos. If you want performance on a super car you pay for it from the factory. Aftermarket mods on a super car would junk it. STOCK.

Your argument was that there is no aftermarket for supercars. I proved you wrong. Stop moving the goal posts. If putting an aftermarekt exhaust and headers a Mustang doesn't "junk it", why would it be any different if you did the same to a Lamborghini?

*sigh there's no right or wrong when we are speculating about how things will be done in the future. There's just logical arguments like mine, and irrational and unsupported ones like yours. :lol:

Unsupported? You're the one arguing that nobody is modifying electric vehicles while I literally give you examples of people doing just that. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing now. Give it up.

lol, no. I meant don't act like you haven't heard this all before. You're acting like because you posted it here the answers you would get would be different.

I like getting multiple peoples' opinions. Even yours, surprisingly.

If there's potential to be utilized in an EV the manufacturers will most likely utilize most of it, like Tesla is doing, rendering the aftermarket performance hobby a thing of the past.

And I already explained why that would not be the case. Even if you make 100% use of the drivetrain, you can still upgrade the drivetrain to perform better. In that way, it's similar to ICEs. The methods are ENTIRELY different, but the end result is the same.

They're buying them as replacements, not as performance mods. You might think this is the same thing but it isn't.

Well it sort of is, since the reason why many of your EV converters use Tesla motors with Volt packs instead of Tesla packs is because the Volt packs discharge quicker. I also remember reading about a guy replacing the battery of his Zero motorcycle with a custom pack made from Tesla cells. There's no aftermarket modules (yet), so people are making do.

Well if you read what I wrote for comprehension you wouldn't be making up this strawman. I hate when people don't read and come back with something totally irrelevant and completely obvious. Everyone knows the cost of lithum ion cells is coming down.

PEOPLE WANT MORE CAPACITY, UNTIL THAT DEMAND PLATEAUS THE COST OF EV BATTERIES WILL CONTINUE TO RISE.

Capacity HAS been rising as cost has been dropping. We're talking overall trends here, not a car to car basis.

I would say there is room for discussion on this point. At some point people, say 500 miles of range, people will probably stop demanding more and the cost will start going down. But then are concerns about the availability of raw materials. I think it's hard to say much beyond the next 5-10 years.

I'd say you're right on this one. After electric cars get the same range on a charge as a gas car people will likley care less. The only remaining issue would still be charge time I guess, but that would only be a problem on long trips. So maybe you're right - 500 miles is a good number. Longer range than most ICE cars with the downside of slightly longer recharge times.

Good Luck fitting it in there. :lol:

It was hypothetical :lol: There would be a lot of fabrication involved. But like I said before you can still run a stock motor at much higher power assuming you keep it cool, so a motor swap may be mostly redundant anyway.

I'm basing my opinion on what we know about EV's, you want opinions based on how you think past and current ICE modifications will influence EV modifications. But they won't, at least based on the actual evidence we have on hand today.

I'm not comparing ICE modifications to EV modifications, I'm using them as an example of car modifying in general. People generally understand ICE cars better than EVs because they've been so much more prevalent, which is why they're a good example.

That's actually what I said 10 pages ago. Cars won't be fitted with motors that aren't utilizing most of their potential. Only the ones that aren't utilizing their full potential would be desirable for tuning.

That is most electric cars out there already. The motors in electric cars can be run at higher power outputs than what the batteries allow it. The batteries are almost always the limiting factor. That's why people are getting way more horsepower out of Tesla motors when they hook them up to Volt packs (which have a faster discharge than a Tesla pack). Cooling is another issue, but there are ways to solve that too.

Will people try to get more power, possibly. But they will most likely fail spectacularly and become a very tiny portion of the modifications being done to EV's.

Try telling that to the guys modding Zeros in this thread: https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=89559
"With these electric power plants... a 50% power increase is achievable..."

Yah, that's basically what I'm saying. I think where we differ is you think it's feasible and I don't. People don't buy the Pontiac and then buy half a Cadillac to put into the Pontiac, they just buy the Cadillac.

I'll agree that motor swaps won't be as common as, say, just running the stock motor hotter, but people do expensive engine swaps today, I can imagine somebody will fit a Tesla drivetrain into a different car eventually. (EDIT: It's been done - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYY_AlRWQA)

My opinion is based on the cost. If people could do these modifications for $300 a pop, every few weeks, maybe. But the way EV's are being made makes it much more costly. A manufacturer would have to doing something completely different from what Tesla is currently doing and I just don't see that happening for a very long time, if ever.

I see it as being higher upfront costs, but larger power increases. You can get a new exhaust for a few hundred bucks for a minor power increase, but once you start doing cams, injectors, valve springs, tuning, etc, that's when it gets expensive. For an EV let's say you spend 2 grand on a battery module upgrade (just a hypothetical number), but that upgrade gets you 50% more power, versus the exhaust which got you a 5% more power if that.

All of them but the crappy ones.

So most electric cars are crappy then? Unfortunately I tend to agree. Tesla is the only non-crappy one (the Bolt isn't too bad but it's ugly), but that new Porsche looks very promising.

I think the question is if tuners have all this money and don't care about warranties and whatnot where are all these tuned Leaf's and such?

People have been making their own logic boards for the Leafs, and the guy behind the Teslonda says he has experience with modding them. Again, once a company starts providing aftermarket parts you will see it more. Maybe not on the Leaf, since I've just been using the Leaf as an example because of it's relative cheapness/commonness, on other future cars.

If the car isn't a performance car then it can't be tuned. That's the nature of the EV business.

Nissan Leaf NISMO. That is all I have to say here.

All good stuff in this thread. I have to do a capstone project this year and I'm considering this as a starting point. It's worth looking in to further I think.

Despite our disagreements I am enjoying our talk. I hope I haven't alienated you yet. :wink:

So let's look at another opinion...

From the same article:

"While he acknowledges that many systems, such as in the aforementioned Audi, will be difficult to penetrate, that doesn’t mean you can’t swap components or get creative to fashion a fully customized vision."

This is what I'm talking about here. Electric equipment has always been less about tinkering and more about replacing. That is, modules, inverters, controllers, etc. Just like the guys who modify their Zero bikes. Inverters and controllers aren't very large parts, so it wouldn't be hard to fit them somewhere in the car. Modules are large, but would obviously be put within the battery pack in place of old modules.

Also from the article:

"...modders will inevitably go as deep as they can to achieve the performance they crave. In some ways, this will simply be an extension of what we’ve already mastered: hacking the ECU, the process in which the car’s firmware is tweaked by individuals or aftermarket companies to boost performance."

Again, similar stuff to what I've been saying.

 

[furcifer]

Who was talking about NOS?

You said tuners would do anything to run faster. That's just the movies. If it were true everyone would be running NOS.

Tuners don't want to kill their cars. The factory can offer performance tuning on an ap and the idea that this won't be enough because tuners will do anything to go faster is patently false.

Your argument was that there is no aftermarket for supercars. I proved you wrong. Stop moving the goal posts.

Lol, I said Chiron, you moved the goal posts

People don't modify super cars. It devalues them. You have to be rich and dumb to do this. That's my point.

The same thing is likely to happen with EV's. Yes, there are always people willing to do stupid things but they don't represent the actual "scene" or hobby.

Unsupported? You're the one arguing that nobody is modifying electric vehicles while I literally give you examples of people doing just that. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing now. Give it up.

Rubbish. If tuners could do something with EV's they would be flocking to them already. They aren't. Average people are buying Tesla's, taking them to the track STOCK, and blowing the doors off 99% of the modified cars out there, and leaving happy and satisfied with how the car is the way it is.

That's reality. Your fantasy about how EV's can be tuned is just that, a fantasy.

And I already explained why that would not be the case. Even if you make 100% use of the drivetrain, you can still upgrade the drivetrain to perform better. In that way, it's similar to ICEs. The methods are ENTIRELY different, but the end result is the same.

Maybe I'm missing something or not understanding you. Can you give me real examples so I can understand what you are talking about. All I can think of are springs and strut braces. Most of the suspension is computer controlled now and I'm not sure how popular it is to do springs. Strut braces were kind of a fad with ICE's, and with EV's the MASSIVE amount of torque means they have to be built stiffer at the factory.

Well it sort of is, since the reason why many of your EV converters use Tesla motors with Volt packs instead of Tesla packs is because the Volt packs discharge quicker. I also remember reading about a guy replacing the battery of his Zero motorcycle with a custom pack made from Tesla cells. There's no aftermarket modules (yet), so people are making do.

This is the thing, battery technology is way behind, mostly because it's trying to compete with fossil carbon.

If things stay the same, manufacturers have to be at the forefront of battery technology to compete. This means it's going to be extremely difficult for Tier 2 supplies to make their own battery packs. If a new technology came along and someone got proprietary rights over the car manufacturers it might happen, but even then you'd have to compete with the big manufacturers because they would want it for themselves. So I don't see much of an aftermarket for batteries for a very long time.

It was hypothetical :lol: There would be a lot of fabrication involved. But like I said before you can still run a stock motor at much higher power assuming you keep it cool, so a motor swap may be mostly redundant anyway.

EV's are engineered around the motors so putting in a new motor would really mean re-engineering the car. This is a significant difference from ICE's where they typically engineer the bodies to accept multiple motors that can be dropped in. Dreaming of that bigger engine is such a huge part of modifying cars. These EV's are stealing dreams I tell yah.

That is most electric cars out there already. The motors in electric cars can be run at higher power outputs than what the batteries allow it. The batteries are almost always the limiting factor. That's why people are getting way more horsepower out of Tesla motors when they hook them up to Volt packs (which have a faster discharge than a Tesla pack). Cooling is another issue, but there are ways to solve that too.

Fair enough, I'm just saying it won't be a large part of the modification scene in my opinion. Cooling yes, but adapting battery packs no way.

Have you ever split open a battery pack and tried to make something out of it? Just trying to get apart a 6 cell computer battery is a PITA. I can't imagine trying to do that with 7000. So a lot of this depends on which way technology takes us. It does seem to be heading away from cylindrical cells to flat polymer packs so maybe I should be less emphatic about how things will pan out in the future.

Try telling that to the guys modding Zeros in this thread: https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=89559
"With these electric power plants... a 50% power increase is achievable..." /

Tiny. Low Voltage. Not even a full size motorcycle, let alone car


Shhh, that stays in this thread.

I'll agree that motor swaps won't be as common as, say, just running the stock motor hotter, but people do expensive engine swaps today, I can imagine somebody will fit a Tesla drivetrain into a different car eventually. (EDIT: It's been done - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYY_AlRWQA)

I'll check that out.

I see it as being higher upfront costs, but larger power increases. You can get a new exhaust for a few hundred bucks for a minor power increase, but once you start doing cams, injectors, valve springs, tuning, etc, that's when it gets expensive. For an EV let's say you spend 2 grand on a battery module upgrade (just a hypothetical number), but that upgrade gets you 50% more power, versus the exhaust which got you a 5% more power if that.

Time will tell. Let's revisit this thread in 10 years and see if your numbers match up to reality.

So most electric cars are crappy then? Unfortunately I tend to agree. Tesla is the only non-crappy one (the Bolt isn't too bad but it's ugly), but that new Porsche looks very promising.

Well at least crappy in the sense that they aren't coming out swinging.

People have been making their own logic boards for the Leafs, and the guy behind the Teslonda says he has experience with modding them. Again, once a company starts providing aftermarket parts you will see it more. Maybe not on the Leaf, since I've just been using the Leaf as an example because of it's relative cheapness/commonness, on other future cars.

Well the ones that aren't tuned suck, and the ones that are tuned, are tuned. It makes it difficult.

Nissan Leaf NISMO. That is all I have to say here.

The RC?

Despite our disagreements I am enjoying our talk. I hope I haven't alienated you yet. :wink:

Not at all. I'm not particularly fond of my own opinion on this matter

"While he acknowledges that many systems, such as in the aforementioned Audi, will be difficult to penetrate, that doesn’t mean you can’t swap components or get creative to fashion a fully customized vision."

This is what I'm talking about here. Electric equipment has always been less about tinkering and more about replacing. That is, modules, inverters, controllers, etc. Just like the guys who modify their Zero bikes. Inverters and controllers aren't very large parts, so it wouldn't be hard to fit them somewhere in the car. Modules are large, but would obviously be put within the battery pack in place of old modules.

Also from the article:

"...modders will inevitably go as deep as they can to achieve the performance they crave. In some ways, this will simply be an extension of what we’ve already mastered: hacking the ECU, the process in which the car’s firmware is tweaked by individuals or aftermarket companies to boost performance."

Again, similar stuff to what I've been saying.

I think swaps are a given. Manufacturers need different versions of cars to appeal to different customers. So even if they do offer the same performance profiles in cars they're probably going to offer upgraded components as part of the performance package; ceramic bearings,carbon fibre hoods, aluminum this, titanium that.
The same goes for the tweaks. Within the next year or two EV's will have as many driving profiles as there are screen savers. But these are such an integral part of an EV I wouldn't consider them mods, anymore than I would consider driving with the windows open and the AC on a mod. Performance is becoming just another "setting".

 

[spinningmagnets]

In this series, a guy named Rich from the youtube channel "rich builds" bought a lightly-wrecked Zero motorcycle very cheap at an insurance auction, and after deciding it wasn't worth repairing, he then decided to put it in a light rat rod.

"My electric rat rod wiring Hell"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ_R0qUhG0g

[youtube]oZ_R0qUhG0g[/youtube]

 

[SquidBonez]

You said tuners would do anything to run faster. That's just the movies. If it were true everyone would be running NOS.

You're taking things too literally. Okay, let's reword that then. Tuners will always try to improve the performance of their cars. Better?

Lol, I said Chiron, you moved the goal posts

You specifically cherry-picked a car that is extremely limited production and very expensive.

People don't modify super cars. It devalues them.

Yes, they do. You're just denying reality now. People do. Or else there would be no aftermarket. Seriously go on YouTube and you can find all sorts of instances of people with way too much money turning Lamborghinis into drift cars or death karts.

Rubbish. If tuners could do something with EV's they would be flocking to them already. They aren't.

That's because most tuners have no clue how an electric vehicle works, and more on top of that dislike them (electric cars aren't seen as "cool" by everyone yet). Hell, 97% of employed mechanics don't even know how to work on EVs yet. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/12/10/97-of-auto-mechanics-cant-work-on-electric-cars-new-report-concludes/

Average people are buying Tesla's, taking them to the track STOCK, and blowing the doors off 99% of the modified cars out there, and leaving happy and satisfied with how the car is the way it is.

I already brought up the collaboration between Tesla Racing Channel and 057 Technology. Sure they may just be two guys, but they are the START of Tesla modding. Mountain Pass Performance is also selling modifications for the Model 3, but mostly in the form of a "race module" that disables the driver aids. But the fact is that if a larger aftermarket existed, we'd see more people doing it. But even when the aftermarket is extremely limited, we already have people beginning to modify their Teslas.

That's reality. Your fantasy about how EV's can be tuned is just that, a fantasy.

You continue to deny reality. You tell me I'm wrong, I show you actual examples of why I'm right. How am I the one living in a fantasy?

Maybe I'm missing something or not understanding you. Can you give me real examples so I can understand what you are talking about.

Okay, so just a general example. If my stock battery with a aftermarket battery that has a higher discharge rate, I can provide more amps to the motor and thus generate more power. This is what people have been doing with Tesla motors by hooking them up to Chevy Volt packs, since the Volt batteries have a higher discharge rate than Tesla modules.

This is the thing, battery technology is way behind, mostly because it's trying to compete with fossil carbon.

Absolutely. It will improve in the future obviously, which is good for both automakers and tuners.

If things stay the same, manufacturers have to be at the forefront of battery technology to compete. This means it's going to be extremely difficult for Tier 2 supplies to make their own battery packs. If a new technology came along and someone got proprietary rights over the car manufacturers it might happen, but even then you'd have to compete with the big manufacturers because they would want it for themselves. So I don't see much of an aftermarket for batteries for a very long time.

Well it's still possible for an aftermarket company to create a battery with a higher discharge rate than what the stock modules provide, even without technological advancement. You could also wire the modules in series rather than parallel if you're not concerned about range.

EV's are engineered around the motors so putting in a new motor would really mean re-engineering the car. This is a significant difference from ICE's where they typically engineer the bodies to accept multiple motors that can be dropped in.

Electric motors aren't that huge though, so if you could find a motor that could fit in place of the stock motor, and fabricate some mounts, you could probably make it work. In that sense it wouldn't be that different from an ICE engine swap, but I don't think it would be that common since like I said before, you could probably just make use of the stock motor for 99% of your upgrades.

Fair enough, I'm just saying it won't be a large part of the modification scene in my opinion. Cooling yes, but adapting battery packs no way.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see. :wink:

Have you ever split open a battery pack and tried to make something out of it? Just trying to get apart a 6 cell computer battery is a PITA. I can't imagine trying to do that with 7000. So a lot of this depends on which way technology takes us. It does seem to be heading away from cylindrical cells to flat polymer packs so maybe I should be less emphatic about how things will pan out in the future.

I doubt people will change out individual cells if that's what you're saying, I was thinking they would simply remove the stock modules (gutting the battery case), and place in aftermarket, pre-made modules. Or use the modules from a different car entirely, hook up an aftermarket controller, and be on your way.

Tiny. Low Voltage.

Small yes, but it operates on the same principles as a larger vehicle. It just shows that it is possible.

Time will tell. Let's revisit this thread in 10 years and see if your numbers match up to reality.

I'll keep it bookmarked.

The RC?

This one:

I think swaps are a given. Manufacturers need different versions of cars to appeal to different customers. So even if they do offer the same performance profiles in cars they're probably going to offer upgraded components as part of the performance package; ceramic bearings,carbon fibre hoods, aluminum this, titanium that.
The same goes for the tweaks. Within the next year or two EV's will have as many driving profiles as there are screen savers. But these are such an integral part of an EV I wouldn't consider them mods, anymore than I would consider driving with the windows open and the AC on a mod. Performance is becoming just another "setting".

Just to add on to my previous post here, like we talked about before there is less to upgrade on an electric car than a gas car. On a gas car you can take the same engine and add parts to it to make it faster. On an EV you can take the same motor and give it more power, but you don't really change anything about the motor mechanically. So software is really only going to take us so far. And like you said, if manufacturers start allowing you to tweak your software within the car itself, there isn't going to be much reason for "flashing" the ECU on an otherwise stock car. That would only start applying when you start swapping hardware (or replacing the controller altogether).

 

[furcifer]

You're taking things too literally. Okay, let's reword that then. Tuners will always try to improve the performance of their cars. Better?

No, because I said it's likely EV's will come tuned, and you said but people will push it further because that's what tuners do. But they don't actually do that. Some, but not most.

You specifically cherry-picked a car that is extremely limited production and very expensive.

True. But that's the point. The more expensive a car is the less likely it is to be tuned. Because people weigh the cost to benefit ratio. A lot of what I'm seeing here is the notion that modifications will happen just because, and that's not true.

Yes, they do. You're just denying reality now. People do. Or else there would be no aftermarket. Seriously go on YouTube and you can find all sorts of instances of people with way too much money turning Lamborghinis into drift cars or death karts.

No they don't. Like I said, you need to go to a car show like the Woodward Dream cruise and interact with real people and not get information through Youtube and movies.
(and yes, some do but it's very, vert few)

That's because most tuners have no clue how an electric vehicle works, and more on top of that dislike them (electric cars aren't seen as "cool" by everyone yet). Hell, 97% of employed mechanics don't even know how to work on EVs yet. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/12/10/97-of-auto-mechanics-cant-work-on-electric-cars-new-report-concludes/

I'd say that not true. I'd say almost every tuner sees the 0-60 numbers on EV's and starts to drool.

And talking about mechanics, I don't expect many of them will. That's a topic for another discussion.

I already brought up the collaboration between Tesla Racing Channel and 057 Technology. Sure they may just be two guys, but they are the START of Tesla modding. Mountain Pass Performance is also selling modifications for the Model 3, but mostly in the form of a "race module" that disables the driver aids. But the fact is that if a larger aftermarket existed, we'd see more people doing it. But even when the aftermarket is extremely limited, we already have people beginning to modify their Teslas.

Yah, I'd have to take a closer look, but at first glance it looks like 90% of the modifications are to the cars EFFICIENCY and traction. Less weight, more tires.
The other 10% looks like they've disabled the launch mode preparation.

You continue to deny reality. You tell me I'm wrong, I show you actual examples of why I'm right. How am I the one living in a fantasy?

Well everything you've presented is predicated upon the future being different from how it is and going back to like it was with ICE's.
Tesla is putting out sub 3 second sedans and sub 2 second sports cars. I'm sorry but that's how it is and that's the future of EV's.

Nobody tunes vehicles that do these numbers. You say but there are, I say not many and only if they have more money than brains. Reality vs. Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.

Okay, so just a general example. If my stock battery with a aftermarket battery that has a higher discharge rate, I can provide more amps to the motor and thus generate more power. This is what people have been doing with Tesla motors by hooking them up to Chevy Volt packs, since the Volt batteries have a higher discharge rate than Tesla modules.

If you want to compare this to ICE's then it's like gasoline vs. alcohol IMO. There are tons of cars than run on alcohol but for the most part the modification world never adopted that fuel.

Well it's still possible for an aftermarket company to create a battery with a higher discharge rate than what the stock modules provide, even without technological advancement. You could also wire the modules in series rather than parallel if you're not concerned about range.

This would be equivalent to alcohol in my opinion as well. And mind you alcohol is rather easy to get, so why aren't cars running alcohol and NOS? Both of these would "improve the performance of a car" as you say.

Electric motors aren't that huge though, so if you could find a motor that could fit in place of the stock motor, and fabricate some mounts, you could probably make it work. In that sense it wouldn't be that different from an ICE engine swap, but I don't think it would be that common since like I said before, you could probably just make use of the stock motor for 99% of your upgrades.

I've seen Mini's with 350's tearing around a track in Ohio. You have to push the firewall back, but it's possible to fit them. It's super rare to see mods like this, and I'd say it's still easier than trying to fit a new motor into an EV.

I doubt people will change out individual cells if that's what you're saying, I was thinking they would simply remove the stock modules (gutting the battery case), and place in aftermarket, pre-made modules. Or use the modules from a different car entirely, hook up an aftermarket controller, and be on your way.

Yah well it's not that easy though. Basically you've add "Hacker" to the resume of anyone that wants to tune their EV. Not only do you have to fabricate, rewire and hack, you have to tune the entire system.

EV's just don't have drop in modifications. It's wishful thinking to expect they will.

Small yes, but it operates on the same principles as a larger vehicle. It just shows that it is possible.

Anything is possible. I could just as well say the future of EV tuning is hooking them up to purple unicorns that fart rainbows and smell like cotton candy.

Just to add on to my previous post here, like we talked about before there is less to upgrade on an electric car than a gas car. On a gas car you can take the same engine and add parts to it to make it faster. On an EV you can take the same motor and give it more power, but you don't really change anything about the motor mechanically. So software is really only going to take us so far. And like you said, if manufacturers start allowing you to tweak your software within the car itself, there isn't going to be much reason for "flashing" the ECU on an otherwise stock car. That would only start applying when you start swapping hardware (or replacing the controller altogether).

Yah, but it's the software that's keeping these things from flying apart at the seams and blowing up.

 

[SquidBonez]

No, because I said it's likely EV's will come tuned, and you said but people will push it further because that's what tuners do. But they don't actually do that. Some, but not most.

A tuner is someone who improves the performance of a car. At least, that's what I mean when I say "tuner". This isn't necessarily limited to the powertrain, but that is what I was referring to.

True. But that's the point. The more expensive a car is the less likely it is to be tuned. Because people weigh the cost to benefit ratio. A lot of what I'm seeing here is the notion that modifications will happen just because, and that's not true.

I...actually agree. Less people can afford to so less people do it. But you seemed to imply that NOBODY was doing it when that just isn't true.

No they don't...(and yes, some do but it's very, vert few)

So do people do it or do they not? The answer is yes, they do. It's not often, because again, they're expensive, but it still happens. You can look this up yourself. Type in "modified (x supercar)" into Google and you will get pictures, videos, parts for sale, etc. It's a niche market, but it exists. That was my point.

I'd say that not true. I'd say almost every tuner sees the 0-60 numbers on EV's and starts to drool.

0-60 numbers are impressive, but there's a lot more to a car than that. That's a conversation for another time though. A lot of your typical "enthusiasts" don't like electric cars because there's no engine noise. I've talked to a lot of them. They'll give you tons of reasons as to why electric cars are actually worse (they're usually wrong), but it all stems back to the noise argument. I should know - I used to be one of them until I actually started learning about EVs. :lol:

Yah, I'd have to take a closer look, but at first glance it looks like 90% of the modifications are to the cars EFFICIENCY and traction. Less weight, more tires.
The other 10% looks like they've disabled the launch mode preparation.

057 specializes more in EV conversions, but they have a lot of experience with those Tesla motors. So they haven't said what they'd be doing specifically, just that they're doing...something...which is undoubtedly related to the powertrain.

Nobody tunes vehicles that do these numbers. You say but there are, I say not many and only if they have more money than brains. Reality vs. Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.

Well, we've already talked about people tuning sub-3 second cars, so no, they do. I would agree that most people would be quite content with the stock performance of their 3 second car and thus not feel the need to modify it, but as I've said before, not every future electric vehicle will be that fast. There will undoubtedly be an entry level sports car or even "sporty" commuter car that is nowhere near that fast and ripe for modding. And that's just cars. There's still motorcycle, dirt bike, quad, UTV, jetski, snowmobile, etc, enthusiasts who are going through the same trend of electrification as cars and would be more than happy to eek out more performance from their electric machines.

If you want to compare this to ICE's then it's like gasoline vs. alcohol IMO. There are tons of cars than run on alcohol but for the most part the modification world never adopted that fuel.

I don't think that's an accurate comparison. Both of these cars use lithium ion batteries, one just simply has a higher discharge rate. I get what you're trying to say but it's not really comparable here.

This would be equivalent to alcohol in my opinion as well. And mind you alcohol is rather easy to get, so why aren't cars running alcohol and NOS? Both of these would "improve the performance of a car" as you say.

Because to do so you would have to completely modify the fuel system/engine to be able to correctly run off alcohol. An EV running a higher discharge battery than stock would be more comparable to changing the fuel pump out of your ICE car to provide more fuel to the engine, thus more power. NOS, on the other hand, is being phased out anyway - even in the drag scene. Turbos and superchargers are taking a lot of the market share.

I've seen Mini's with 350's tearing around a track in Ohio. You have to push the firewall back, but it's possible to fit them. It's super rare to see mods like this, and I'd say it's still easier than trying to fit a new motor into an EV.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be difficult, but I'm just saying it might not be as impossible as you might think. You may have some clearance/mounting issues to get around, but assuming none are too severe it should be possible. At least if you're starting with a car that's already built from the ground-up as an EV, it's sort of "optimized" to run electric motors. It would be a pretty big undertaking either way.

Yah well it's not that easy though. Basically you've add "Hacker" to the resume of anyone that wants to tune their EV. Not only do you have to fabricate, rewire and hack, you have to tune the entire system.

You can buy standalone ECUs that can run any engine (MoTeC for example), so who's to say you couldn't have an EV equivalent of a MoTeC? Modern day EV "tuners", sure, they are very much hackers. But swapping to a MoTeC ECU doesn't require hacking/programming. So if/when a company comes out with an aftermarket controller designed to run electric drivetrains, there would be no hacking involved. At that point, it would just be changing values. In fact it would probably be easier since there would be no air/fuel ratios to worry about, just how much amperage and when. This is already what 057 does with Tesla motors for EV conversions. No hacking required - just changing values/limits. Or take the Zero guys for example. They don't bother trying to crack the stock controller, they just replace it with their own which gives them complete control over the system. Mountain Pass Performance, too, is selling plug and play modules that are designed to work as soon as you plug it into the car. If they could create a module to allow for powertrain tuning, then this could also be a possibility.

Yah, but it's the software that's keeping these things from flying apart at the seams and blowing up.

Yeah but that's the same with modern ICEs too. If you program the ECU wrong, you could ruin an engine. Demand too much of an EV and you could pop/overheat something.

 

[furcifer]

So do people do it or do they not? The answer is yes, they do. It's not often, because again, they're expensive, but it still happens. You can look this up yourself. Type in "modified (x supercar)" into Google and you will get pictures, videos, parts for sale, etc. It's a niche market, but it exists. That was my point.

My point was that it is a niche market.

057 specializes more in EV conversions, but they have a lot of experience with those Tesla motors. So they haven't said what they'd be doing specifically, just that they're doing...something...which is undoubtedly related to the powertrain.

I doubt it. They'd have to fabricate parts and neither appear to be machinists with the knowledge to do so.

Well, we've already talked about people tuning sub-3 second cars, so no, they do. I would agree that most people would be quite content with the stock performance of their 3 second car and thus not feel the need to modify it, but as I've said before, not every future electric vehicle will be that fast. There will undoubtedly be an entry level sports car or even "sporty" commuter car that is nowhere near that fast and ripe for modding. And that's just cars. There's still motorcycle, dirt bike, quad, UTV, jetski, snowmobile, etc, enthusiasts who are going through the same trend of electrification as cars and would be more than happy to eek out more performance from their electric machines.

Ugh, the presumption is that they can be that fast but they aren't because of "some reason". There is no reason.

I don't think that's an accurate comparison. Both of these cars use lithium ion batteries, one just simply has a higher discharge rate. I get what you're trying to say but it's not really comparable here.

That's exactly the difference between the combustion of gasoline and the combustion alcohol. So it is, you're just avoiding the obvious comparison.

Because to do so you would have to completely modify the fuel system/engine to be able to correctly run off alcohol.

Like complete modifying the wiring/controller/inverter/battery and programming of an EV?

An EV running a higher discharge battery than stock would be more comparable to changing the fuel pump out of your ICE car to provide more fuel to the engine, thus more power. NOS, on the other hand, is being phased out anyway - even in the drag scene. Turbos and superchargers are taking a lot of the market share.

Nope. The fuel pump is a 30 minute drop in modification on an ICE. If you don't have to change the fuel lines. More amps means better battery, better wiring, upgrading the controller and/or inverter and reprogramming the entire system to accommodate the changes.

Again, you keep trying to over simplify things to prove your point and it's being totally blown out of the water.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be difficult, but I'm just saying it might not be as impossible as you might think. You may have some clearance/mounting issues to get around, but assuming none are too severe it should be possible. At least if you're starting with a car that's already built from the ground-up as an EV, it's sort of "optimized" to run electric motors. It would be a pretty big undertaking either way.

Nothing is impossible. I'm pretty sure I've done my best to say this, over, and over, and over, and over again.

You can buy standalone ECUs that can run any engine (MoTeC for example), so who's to say you couldn't have an EV equivalent of a MoTeC? Modern day EV "tuners", sure, they are very much hackers. But swapping to a MoTeC ECU doesn't require hacking/programming. So if/when a company comes out with an aftermarket controller designed to run electric drivetrains, there would be no hacking involved. At that point, it would just be changing values. In fact it would probably be easier since there would be no air/fuel ratios to worry about, just how much amperage and when. This is already what 057 does with Tesla motors for EV conversions. No hacking required - just changing values/limits. Or take the Zero guys for example. They don't bother trying to crack the stock controller, they just replace it with their own which gives them complete control over the system. Mountain Pass Performance, too, is selling plug and play modules that are designed to work as soon as you plug it into the car. If they could create a module to allow for powertrain tuning, then this could also be a possibility.

It's still harder to adapt an EV to a new battery than it is to adapt a car to run alcohol, and that's not being done. Your fantasy relies on people "not giving up" but they already are, and it's still early.

Yeah but that's the same with modern ICEs too. If you program the ECU wrong, you could ruin an engine. Demand too much of an EV and you could pop/overheat something.

And the wiggle room in doing ECU's is only because of the inefficiency. With an EV the tolerances are so much tighter because the motor is so efficient. Screw up an ICE ECU and it runs bad, screw up a EV program and you light up like a Christmas tree or destroy a $10K battery.

That's a fact. I've worked on electrical and on engines. If you have you know there's very few opportunities to recover from mistakes with electrical. You're either running properly with electrical or you're spot welding.

 

[SquidBonez]

I doubt it. They'd have to fabricate parts and neither appear to be machinists with the knowledge to do so.

It would be software based, not hardware. 057 just does controllers.

Ugh, the presumption is that they can be that fast but they aren't because of "some reason". There is no reason.

The reason being that the components that allow a Tesla to do 0-60 in under 3 seconds cost a lot of money. Just as the engine in a Lamborgini Huracan costs way more than the engine in a Nissan Altima. High performance parts cost a lot of money.

That's exactly the difference between the combustion of gasoline and the combustion alcohol. So it is, you're just avoiding the obvious comparison.

I'm not avoiding it, it's just a completely different source of fuel. Modern electric cars operate by using lithium ion batteries and AC motors. A higher output battery is nothing more than a more powerful fuel system.

Like complete modifying the wiring/controller/inverter/battery and programming of an EV?

My point is that gasoline and alcohol are different types of fuel, while EVs would still be using the same type of battery - one just providing more discharge than the other. That's why I say it's not comparable. We aren't talking about two different types of fuel, we're talking about providing MORE fuel (or in this case, electricity) to the motor.

Nope. The fuel pump is a 30 minute drop in modification on an ICE. If you don't have to change the fuel lines. More amps means better battery, better wiring, upgrading the controller and/or inverter and reprogramming the entire system to accommodate the changes.

Sigh...we aren't talking about the difficulty of install. You tried to make a comparison, and I provided my own. The fuel pump in an ICE is the closest thing to a battery in an EV. Don't take this literally. If you get an upgraded fuel pump, you can pump more fuel to the engine quicker, which means more power. If you have a battery with a higher discharge rate, you can get more amps into the motor faster, which means more power. Do you get what I'm trying to say? It's not a 1:1 comparison, I'm just using ICEs as an example to get my point across.

Again, you keep trying to over simplify things to prove your point and it's being totally blown out of the water.

No you're just not understanding a simple comparison.

It's still harder to adapt an EV to a new battery than it is to adapt a car to run alcohol, and that's not being done.

Not really. Assuming you get the components to play nice with one another (which is the hardest part), it's mechanically way simpler to get an EV running right than getting an ICE to run right.

Your fantasy relies on people "not giving up" but they already are, and it's still early.

People haven't "given up" because they're literally just starting to modify electric vehicles NOW. Again, I've given you examples already. The reason it's not "mainstream" yet is because electric vehicles themselves are not "mainstream". It's very hard to work on electric cars at the moment because you have to do everything yourself - including software. When an aftermarket forms it will be way easier for the casual DIY-er to do. Think about how hard it would be to work on ICE cars if there were no aftermarket and very little information available online/in books. That's the current situation electric vehicles are facing. Again, 97% of mechanics - professionals who work on cars for a living - don't even know how to work on EVs, so it's amazing people are ALREADY doing so in their garages. It's not a fantasy. But no matter how many times I tell you this it just seems to get ignored. Give it time. As electric cars start becoming more plentiful there will be more information available and more people will have experience working on them.

And the wiggle room in doing ECU's is only because of the inefficiency. With an EV the tolerances are so much tighter because the motor is so efficient. Screw up an ICE ECU and it runs bad, screw up a EV program and you light up like a Christmas tree or destroy a $10K battery.

That's a fact. I've worked on electrical and on engines. If you have you know there's very few opportunities to recover from mistakes with electrical. You're either running properly with electrical or you're spot welding.

Maybe so, but that isn't stopping people from doing it.

 

[furcifer]

The reason being that the components that allow a Tesla to do 0-60 in under 3 seconds cost a lot of money. Just as the engine in a Lamborgini Huracan costs way more than the engine in a Nissan Altima. High performance parts cost a lot of money.

So cost is a factor. So what performance part costs a lot of money in a Tesla?

I'm not avoiding it, it's just a completely different source of fuel.

lol, you wish. The name is different but it's the same combustible fuel. Just with some tweaks to the chemistry, the exact same as changing battery chemistry. It's basically like saying cobalt batteries are different from manganese. But you aren't saying that.

My point is that gasoline and alcohol are different types of fuel, while EVs would still be using the same type of battery - one just providing more discharge than the other. That's why I say it's not comparable. We aren't talking about two different types of fuel, we're talking about providing MORE fuel (or in this case, electricity) to the motor.

Yah no. You may want to think about this for a second. There are plenty of E85 vehicles on the road, and you're trying to say it's a different fuel, but it isn't. :wink:

Sigh...we aren't talking about the difficulty of install.

We most certainly are. Maybe you aren't because you can imagine anything is possible. But it isn't.

You tried to make a comparison, and I provided my own. The fuel pump in an ICE is the closest thing to a battery in an EV.

Nope. Otherwise NASCAR and NHRA would be cars with big fuel pumps!

Don't take this literally. If you get an upgraded fuel pump, you can pump more fuel to the engine quicker, which means more power. If you have a battery with a higher discharge rate, you can get more amps into the motor faster, which means more power. Do you get what I'm trying to say? It's not a 1:1 comparison, I'm just using ICEs as an example to get my point across.

Yah but think about what you are saying. On one hand you want to say it's by chemistry (the Volt battery), but on the other hand you want to say it's by quantity(fuel pump). Apples and oranges bro.

I've got a back ground in physics so you're not pulling the wool over my eyes. I know what's what

No you're just not understanding a simple comparison.

Yes and by every example I've provided coming from the actual people that work on these vehicles as a profession, it isn't a simple comparison.

Not really. Assuming you get the components to play nice with one another (which is the hardest part), it's mechanically way simpler to get an EV running right than getting an ICE to run right.

You assume all you want, I'm about facts.

The entire reason we're not all driving EV's today is because it's extremely difficult to "get the components to play nice with each other" Well that and batteries.


[

People haven't "given up" because they're literally just starting to modify electric vehicles NOW. Again,

Except I've given you an example of an EV tuner that has. And he's detailed the reasons why he has.

I've given you examples already. The reason it's not "mainstream" yet is because electric vehicles themselves are not "mainstream". It's very hard to work on electric cars at the moment because you have to do everything yourself - including software.

Yah, good luck calling technical support on this.

It's a very specialized field repairing computers. You don't just call tech support and rewire the graphics card on your computer. But for some reason you think EV's are going to be less complex in the future.

You seem to forget modifications are about doing it yourself. When you can't you take it to a mechanic, which costs a fortune. Now you're talking about taking something to the mechanic that cost even more because it is more time consuming and more dangerous.

When an aftermarket forms it will be way easier for the casual DIY-er to do. Think about how hard it would be to work on ICE cars if there were no aftermarket and very little information available online/in books.

I'd say think about the aftermarket if it takes a computer science degree and an electrical engineering degree to do it.

Again, your whole argument is based on things be as simple as they are with ICE's and they aren't.

Honestly, if I thought they were I would agree with you. If a company does come up with a drop-in plug and play modification I agree it will be used.

Maybe so, but that isn't stopping people from doing it.

Just the sensible ones, which is probably 95% of the people doing it.

 

[spinningmagnets]

The stock Sur-Ron electric dirt motorcycle was selling well as soon as it came out. Luna Cycles found a controller that would provide more amps to help acceleration, and they sold it as the Sur-Ron "X" as an upgrade. It's possible that the motor might run hotter, and run hotter more often, but...this is one real-world example of a distributor "hot-rodding" a stock product.

Due to the popularity (and profits) of upgrades for those customers that want that, there is a battery coming out that provides more amps than even the X-controller can draw.

These mods were tried out by ES member Farfle and LFP/Luke before they were made available to the public. Does that make Jackson/Farfle and LFP/Luke "tuners"? I think so. Ashley Cho's Zero motorcycle has performance mods that are not available to the public.

Manufacturers (of both ICE and EV) often add in a safety margin to make sure that the motor/controller/and battery do not get too hot under customer abuse. However, increasing the amps of the controller (or swapping-in a higher amp controller) seems to be the first "most desirable" upgrade.

Raising the voltage of the battery would require changing the battery and controller, but...upgrading the amps on the controller alone might allow the stock battery to be used (perhaps with a shortened life-cycle).

"How Will Electric Vehicles Be Modified in the Future?". So far, more amps seems to be the most popular first step...

 

[SquidBonez]

So cost is a factor. So what performance part costs a lot of money in a Tesla?

Most notably the state of the art motor and high discharge battery pack.

lol, you wish. The name is different but it's the same combustible fuel. Just with some tweaks to the chemistry, the exact same as changing battery chemistry. It's basically like saying cobalt batteries are different from manganese. But you aren't saying that.

Well, I guess I'll give you that one.

We most certainly are. Maybe you aren't because you can imagine anything is possible. But it isn't.

Are you saying it's impossible to get a motor from one car to run off the battery from another? It isn't. It's been done many times.

Yah but think about what you are saying. On one hand you want to say it's by chemistry (the Volt battery), but on the other hand you want to say it's by quantity(fuel pump). Apples and oranges bro.

Aren't the Tesla modules and Volt modules the same chemistry though? I was under the impression that they were.

The entire reason we're not all driving EV's today is because it's extremely difficult to "get the components to play nice with each other" Well that and batteries.

It really isn't hard. What's keeping EVs back now is infrastructure, cost, range, etc. That will change, of course.

Except I've given you an example of an EV tuner that has. And he's detailed the reasons why he has.

And I gave you examples of people who work on them TODAY. I can tell this is just going to go back and forth.

But for some reason you think EV's are going to be less complex in the future.

I never said that.

Now you're talking about taking something to the mechanic that cost even more because it is more time consuming and more dangerous.

No, I'm simply pointing out that it is the aftermarket companies are the ones who do the fine-tuning on computers (something that is very difficult for a causal DIY-er). When I want to get a reflash, I don't hack my car's ECU myself, I send out the ECU to a company that specializes in flashing it.

Honestly, if I thought they were I would agree with you. If a company does come up with a drop-in plug and play modification I agree it will be used.

I've been saving this for last, but while we've been going back and forth for about a week(?) or so now, guess what Steinbauer just announced today?

As I said literally just days ago, when aftermarket companies begin working with electric cars, we will start to see performance mods. Well guess what? They just started.

This is only the beginning of things to come. Soon we will see even more "advanced"/"intrusive" modifications.

 

[furcifer]

The stock Sur-Ron electric dirt motorcycle was selling well as soon as it came out. Luna Cycles found a controller that would provide more amps to help acceleration, and they sold it as the Sur-Ron "X" as an upgrade. It's possible that the motor might run hotter, and run hotter more often, but...this is one real-world example of a distributor "hot-rodding" a stock product.

Due to the popularity (and profits) of upgrades for those customers that want that, there is a battery coming out that provides more amps than even the X-controller can draw.

These mods were tried out by ES member Farfle and LFP/Luke before they were made available to the public. Does that make Jackson/Farfle and LFP/Luke "tuners"? I think so. Ashley Cho's Zero motorcycle has performance mods that are not available to the public.

Manufacturers (of both ICE and EV) often add in a safety margin to make sure that the motor/controller/and battery do not get too hot under customer abuse. However, increasing the amps of the controller (or swapping-in a higher amp controller) seems to be the first "most desirable" upgrade.

Raising the voltage of the battery would require changing the battery and controller, but...upgrading the amps on the controller alone might allow the stock battery to be used (perhaps with a shortened life-cycle).

"How Will Electric Vehicles Be Modified in the Future?". So far, more amps seems to be the most popular first step...

For sure.

My main contention is that automotive manufacturers aren't likely to leave this on the table once production becomes more routine. The factory installed controller, inverter, battery, motor and wiring should balanced to such and extent that pushing more amps beyond the "performance mode" means replacing at least 4 of those things, with the motor being the possible exception.

I just don't see many people making very expensive mods that could seriously damage the car, just to shave a few tenths of a second.

 

[furcifer]

I've been saving this for last, but while we've been going back and forth for about a week(?) or so now, guess what Steinbauer just announced today?

As I said literally just days ago, when aftermarket companies begin working with electric cars, we will start to see performance mods. Well guess what? They just started.

It's also the first ever "performance mod" to come with a disclaimer saying it might not work.

Of course time will tell, but honestly, what do you think they've done that Tesla can't do but simply won't because it ruins the car? There's nothing that module can offer that Tesla can't.

And it depends on what you consider a performance modification. They sold a ton of spoilers for cars under the guise of performance that were merely ugly customization that took away from performance. It's all snake oil and some people will fall for that just because of the placebo effect.

So let's give this a couple months and wait for the Youtube videos and reviews before we start doing donuts on the track.

This is only the beginning of things to come. Soon we will see even more "advanced"/"intrusive" modifications.

Indeed. I think you might be better off looking to computers and over clocking to get an idea of what's to come.

 

[furcifer]

Are you saying it's impossible to get a motor from one car to run off the battery from another? It isn't. It's been done many times.

Grr...obviously not. No I'm saying it's much more analogous to switching to another fuel in an ICE as it pertains to performance.

In one car yes, it can be a simple swap. In another it;s going to require extensive modification.

(it's not the greatest analogy because you're actually right for the most part)

Aren't the Tesla modules and Volt modules the same chemistry though? I was under the impression that they were.

I don't believe so. If they discharge faster it's usually because of chemistry. Same anode, but different cathode.

I never said that.

You've implied it.

No, I'm simply pointing out that it is the aftermarket companies are the ones who do the fine-tuning on computers (something that is very difficult for a causal DIY-er). When I want to get a reflash, I don't hack my car's ECU myself, I send out the ECU to a company that specializes in flashing it.

But the ECU is locked to setting because of governments regulations. EV's are fine tuned and not locked into settings because of government regulations.

That's my main point!

 

[SquidBonez]

I just don't see many people making very expensive mods that could seriously damage the car, just to shave a few tenths of a second.

Depending on just how much farther you push the car past stock, gains can be a lot more than a "few tenths". As people start modifying EVs (and blowing them up in the process), we will get a better idea of what components can withstand. Sort of like how many engine blocks can withstand way more power than what is needed in a stock engine.

It's also the first ever "performance mod" to come with a disclaimer saying it might not work.

Where exactly does it say that?

Of course time will tell, but honestly, what do you think they've done that Tesla can't do but simply won't because it ruins the car? There's nothing that module can offer that Tesla can't.

As we've discussed before, even electric cars are tuned where even in their "sport mode", they aren't using 100% of what they could be because of longevity issues. A module like this offers more power at the risk of shorter life.

And it depends on what you consider a performance modification. They sold a ton of spoilers for cars under the guise of performance that were merely ugly customization that took away from performance. It's all snake oil and some people will fall for that just because of the placebo effect.

True but if the company's claims about the module are true, this could be big. I can imagine in the future companies would start selling "staged" kits like they do today along with a tune/module that fits the package. Instead of headers and exhausts and an ECU reflash, it could be contactors, fuses, battery modules, and a performance module. All speculation of course.

So let's give this a couple months and wait for the Youtube videos and reviews before we start doing donuts on the track.

Agreed.

Indeed. I think you might be better off looking to computers and over clocking to get an idea of what's to come.

What do you mean by that? Do you mean modifying electric cars would be more akin to building a PC or...?

 

[SquidBonez]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci5hK9bt6Jw
Here's a good video I found about the topic. The guy from EV West explains how a motor works but also gives some suggestions on how to squeeze more power out of an electric drive.

 

[Hillhater]

Aren't the Tesla modules and Volt modules the same chemistry though? I was under the impression that they were.

To clarify this point...
They are very different ...
Different chemistry....NMC vs NCA (Tesla)
Different cell construction..high Ahr pouch , vs low Ahr cylindical cell (Tesla)
Different design parameters ,..Low capacity, low cell count, high Power, vs High capacity, high Energy, high cell count, (Tesla)

 

[Punx0r]

Actually I do. You don't seem to understand that the difference between the two is what reduces the incidence of premature failure of the part. You seem to think the difference is untapped performance potential that can be unlocked in software settings that will have no negative consequences.

*sigh

The Ambassador Bridge was built in 1927 and connects Canada and the US by the way of the cities of Windsor and Detroit. Since it's construction it's become on of the busiest border crossings in the World. It was designed with a factor of safety of 5 and was designed to carry cars, street cars, trucks and pedestrians. Today it's common to see loaded tractor trailers bumper to bumper in both directions for days on end.

IT HASN'T FAILED.

Sure there's more wear and tear on it, but it hasn't failed. It won't ever fail, because it's built with a factor of safety of 5. The traffic flow and weight it carries every day has increased more than 10 fold, but it hasn't failed. It can't fail because it will never be stressed beyond it's ultimate design strength.

It would take an act of God to do so. Perhaps if it were loaded and in the wind and hit by an earthquake. But it won't fail under normal use, including the massive increase in traffic over the last 100 years.

The factor of safety has nothing to do with wear and tear. Or premature failure. If it were loaded, in the wind and an earth quake hit in 1930 it may have failed just the same as if it happened today. What the factor of safety protects from is unforeseen combinations of stresses, accidents. Defects in materials, fire, snow, earth quakes etc. not more cars and trucks.

The same goes for a vehicles drive train. The increase in power through modification is very small in relation to the allowable design and ultimate strength. If it wasn't, a normal car wouldn't survive the occasional pot hole or curb it encounters regardless of when it happens during the lifespan of the car.

I don't know why you are confusing the two. Do you think Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to live to be the oldest man in the world? I hope not, because strength has nothing to do with longevity and it's really dumb to confuse the two things. But yes, in the unlikely event he and I were pinned under 500lb beams in a fire he might be able to bench press himself out whereas I would probably die.

That is like saying the purpose of the starter motor is to prevent cracking the rear windscreen because if you didn't have a starter you'd have to keep push-starting the car. Any protection a clutch affords the drivetrain is incidental. We'd be here a very long time listing examples of gearboxes, diffs, engines and driveshafts that gave out before the clutch did.

Only if the windscreen were between the starter and the engine and designed to transmit the power between the two. The clutch is a design failure point, a "sacrificial part".

No, big difference: the NOMINAL failure point is 10,000Nm.

What? What's a nominal failure point, I've never heard of this. If the allowable is 1000Nm and the FoS is 10 the ultimate strength is 10000Nm. If you load it to 9500Nm it won't fail, but if you load it to 10500Nm it will fail. If it breaks any sooner you have defective materials or poor design.

The FoS exists because the real-world failure point of any given part may be much less. This is why you're wrong when you insist ludicrous mode can simply be programmed in on standard hardware to reliably utilise this, say, 10x overload capacity.

BS. You don't know what you are talking about. You need to stop this particular avenue of discussion and do some reading.

No, it's unlikely to last 5x longer because that implies a linear relationship, which is unlikely. But if the part is used and loaded as intended then one with a greater FoS will perform for longer, which equals reliability, because it's over-built. The mean failure point of the population of parts will be more standard deviations from the minimum expected service life.

The increase in power is linear. You're not making sense. Do you think it's exponential???

Ultimate strength and service life are two separate things. I don't know where you get this notion you can test the ultimate strength of parts to determine service life. A chair built with a factor of safety of 2 lasts just as long as a chair built with a factor of safety of 20, so long as both are used for what they are designed for.

In fact parts "overbuilt" may have a shorter service life. Or at least shorten the service life of another part in the system by creating additional stresses that serve no purpose. A chair built with a factor of safety of 20 might not last as long as a chair built with a FoS of 2 if it gets banged around or the building around it crumbles under the weight of it's enormous mass. But nobody builds chairs with a FoS of 20 so they last longer.

Strength and durability are strongly related.

Nope.

The definition of strength is the ability of a material to withstand the forces placed on it.

Which has nothing to do with durability.

I would strongly suggest you think about this logically, just for a second. If I build a frame designed to hold 1000lbs, and I load it with 1000lbs. HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I load it with 50lbs. HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I load it with 1lb HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If I don't load it at all HOW LONG WILL IT LAST?

If you derive some relationship between the allowable design, the load and the durability you should win a Nobel Prize.

It cannot be durable if it cannot do this reliably.

Please tell us how the durability is related to strength in the above scenario.

As for running an engine without oil, as I said above "used and loaded as intended". Running without oil is abuse and outside the design scope.

Fine, then run it with no oil pressure.

Because I said you can't just turn up the wick on an EV 'cos potential mechanical failures an
So me pointing out that Tesla actually had problems with early mechanical failure in the drivetrain, not battery and motor failures kinda blows your argument out of the water.

lol, so you're saying design flaws are the weak point? I would tend to agree. It has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

I'm not arguing ludicrous mode on a Tesla doesn't exist. That's a silly argument. What's actually going on is you're arguing that any EV manufacturer can add the equivalent of a ludicrous mode at no cost, efficiency, weight or reliability penalty and this is just wrong.

Oh, well then you're whole argument is a mistake then. There should be a minimal cost, a loss in efficiency and a slight penalty in reliability. Duh.
My argument is that not offering ludicrous mode is going to put any manufacturer at a disadvantage and cut sales revenue, which makes absolutely no sense. To the factory, the cost is minimal, the efficiency isn't their concern and the loss of reliability be customers choosing to engage said modes is a benefit to the bottom line. Duh.


eta: yes, I'm off for two weeks. I'm going to try and build a bike stand so I can do some repairs on my ebike, probably with a factor of safety of 1.5. How long do you think it will last?

Buddy, guy, dude. I haven't the time or inclination to keep correcting you on an ever-expanding number of points, especially since I get the impression you've never before listened to anyone or backed down. This isn't politics or a debating club - the objective isn't to "win" the argument by moving the goalposts and just keep hammering the same point. All I can do is recommend you read a book on mechanical design or materials testing. I think you will find interesting the variability and uncertainty that exists in the real world.

 

[furcifer]

Where exactly does it say that?

At the bottom in fine print.

They aren't doing anything with the module that you and I or the factory can't do.

As we've discussed before, even electric cars are tuned where even in their "sport mode", they aren't using 100% of what they could be because of longevity issues. A module like this offers more power at the risk of shorter life.

And every car could run a 150hp shot of NOS, but most people don't do it.

The type of gains you get with a shot of NOS are way more than you can hope to get out of an electric. If people could double the output of a P100D, like they can by adding a bottle and a 2 stage, maybe they would. But you can't.

Are you following this? If you're going to push your car to dangerous levels there has to be a good reason to do so. Getting 10% isn't enough, and certainly not if you risk ruining expensive parts. With NOS you can get close to double the hp with fairly simple tuning and modules, and people don't do it very much because you run a high risk of failure.

Expensive new cars or cheaper old cars people don't tend to do this. And yet you keep proposing this as if they will.

True but if the company's claims about the module are true, this could be big. I can imagine in the future companies would start selling "staged" kits like they do today along with a tune/module that fits the package. Instead of headers and exhausts and an ECU reflash, it could be contactors, fuses, battery modules, and a performance module. All speculation of course.

Well like I say, the disclaimer at the bottom is telling me it's marginal at best.

Batteries are expensive. Maybe smaller track batteries for running 1/4's? The only problem is that battery weight has a lot to do with traction.

eta: thinking about this, I wonder if capacitors might be the way to go? They seem suited to this type of application where you want high discharge rates and don't care about capacity, or longevity. This seems very interesting....

What do you mean by that? Do you mean modifying electric cars would be more akin to building a PC or...?

In that about 90% of performance tuning a PC is cooling.

 

[furcifer]

Buddy, guy, dude. I haven't the time or inclination to keep correcting you on an ever-expanding number of points, especially since I get the impression you've never before listened to anyone or backed down. This isn't politics or a debating club - the objective isn't to "win" the argument by moving the goalposts and just keep hammering the same point. All I can do is recommend you read a book on mechanical design or materials testing. I think you will find interesting the variability and uncertainty that exists in the real world.

Any reasonable points backed by evidence and supported by logic are worth considering.

I have 2 textbooks, Mechanics of Materials by Hibbler, and Mechanisms And Dynamics Of Machinery Ed: 4 by Mabie. They're for a 3rd Automotive Engineering class in stress analysis and machine dynamics.

What are you basing your opinion on?

 

[Dauntless]

What are you basing your opinion on?

He's basing it on --- HIS OPINION!

I'm thinking one thing, I think the car will be modified or extended in its' life based on performance, period. My Mustang, 112,000 miles, looking like it's about to be 8 years old. People want it. If you can name an econobox in somewhere near so much demand, it'll be a really high mpg car. Remember when gas was at $5/gallon? There were already the clubs looking for mileage, but they boomed at that time. Everybody wanted the Geo Metro, etc., for the ultra mileage. Merely better than average didn't bring the excitement.

So the best sportscars, the Tesla roadster rather than the S, and the longest range electrics, kind of up in the air at the moment, will be the older cars they crack open and wring more out of. It'll already seem extreme and they'll want it more extreme.