DIY Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 20 of 101 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi folks,

During the era a few months back when huge amounts of data vanished from this forum, I decided to do my build thread on my own blog. But things seem to have settled down some and the help and support that this group offers will be huge as I get deeper into the project.

But the blog has already been going, and since I am also involved in a BMW forum and I have various friends, clients and family that are interested to follow along, I decided to just keep the blog and link to it here for each update. The blog is located here in case you are interested:

bmwcse.com




Here's the first post:



My name is Paul Dexter, and I have a problem: I have been a lover of European cars as long as I remember.

Sure, my dad and his ‘50s car club buddies built plenty of American muscle hot rods. But my mom opted to haul us around in various VWs and Volvos.



As I came of age in the ‘80s and ‘90s I began to explore a string of my own European cars. Nothing fancy mind you, I would buy what I could afford, which wasn't much. Always a bit rough, I drove a string of Alfa and Fiat Spiders, Jensen Healey, Triumph, Saab. But German cars were my obsession for their combination of engineering, performance and personality. Plenty of BMWs, Porsche’s VW 16Vs, Audi Quattros, and a few Mercedes passed through my garage. The BMW straight 6 and the Porsche flat 6 engines were so intoxicating for me, they could literally wash away a bad day by joyously going through the gears.
Then Tesla came along.



I was drawn to the refined stealthy, torquey, efficient power. I threw all financial caution to the wind to buy one and it ruined my love for internal combustion engines forever.

Manual shifting is fun sport, but it doesn’t match the gratification of having all the power you could ever dream of at your disposal - at any speed and any time you want it.

But after a few years with the Tesla my soul longed for the one thing I missed from my early cars: Personality. Cars that were drawn by hand, with long hoods and chrome bumpers. Cars that mock wind tunnel tests.
So That Settled It



As Ferdinand Porsche said “I couldn't find the sports car of my dreams, so I built it myself”. Similarly, I decided that what I must do is build my own modern classic for my daily driving enjoyment. Two cars that always topped my list were an early 911 and a BMW 3.0 CS. Both have seen remarkable - perhaps obscene - runs on values in the last ten years. The last thing I wanted to do was destroy the true value of a highly collectible car. Then again I wanted to drive my car, not store it in climate controlled environment and visit it on occasion.

Since I still run the kids to school most days, the BMW coupe made most sense. My wife has always wanted a 2002, so building on its big brother checked even more boxes.

The BMW E9 coupe built by Karman from 1969 to 1975 is one of the most classic and iconic designs of its time. Its pillarless design and shark nose front that went on to define the marque for decades. This Coupe's capable performance and driving experience is responsible for the term “The Ultimate Driving Machine” and firmly footed BMW as a sport-luxury brand.

So if you like, read on, and follow the project. We've got a ways to go...

Cheers,

Paul Dexter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
This blog is broadly written to speak to car enthusiast, electric car fanatics, friends and family, and that person who got bored on the internet one day and stumbled upon this blog. I will try my best to be too technical, too simple, to colorful and too plain since pleasing everyone is impossible anyway.

Finding the Right Coupe

I searched nationally for a good amount of time for the right car at a fair price. Because I want to convert it to electric, I was hoping to find a roller. Something with it's original motor and transmission missing, so that I could feel a little better that I wasn't the first person to cause harm to the collectable originality of the car. My car would certainly have rust, but I wanted to avoid a rolling rust museum. The overall condition of the car did not need to be high, but finding one as original as possible, and with as much of the trim intact was very desirable.

I can not and will not unpack the mysteries of the collector car market and it's currently obscene values of certain cars. Many cars from the 70s and 80s are getting very hot, so what you could get for just $5k a few years back is suddenly costing $20k. In looking for my coupe I wasn't as concerned with value, but I did want to do the best I could to avoid getting caught up in all the hype.


In the end I came a very interesting 1974 3.0 CS through a very off-the-radar listing (really helping with the aforementioned over-valuation hype). It was close by in San Diego. It is a European market car, imported to the US in 1994. This is interesting for a couple of reasons: First, it was driven for many years by actual Europeans, most likely full-throttle on the Autobahn. Second, it means that it has the lovely small bumpers that by 1974 all US market cars did not. They received park bench units that hung well into the next county. What really pleased me is that she is a sunroof model. Those that know me know that if my cars don't have a sunroof, a convertible or a targa, I will likely find a saw nearby and take it to the roof. (You should have seen my 1978 VW Rabbit Targa- it really happened). Sunroofs were rare for the European market, so that's even more interesting.

It was originally Polaris Metalic (silver) with blue leather. At some point the car was painted white, along with it's factory alloy wheels. White wall tires were fitted to complete the interesting look. The car is very complete, with a fairly tidy interior. The power windows work with a little assistance. The car runs and drives. With no working clutch, the driving experience is even more exciting.

Bringing Her Home


With Trailer in tow I headed in her direction. I hadn't actually been able to see the car in person. I had to buy based on photos, more detailed photos, and answers to my many questions. Then I had to pay for the car, then come pick it up at a third party. Highly aware of the common scams, this was clearly not that. It was just a seller that did not or could not deal with the process of showing the car. Since the car was nearly half the price of others I were looking at and in far better overall condition I did take that chance. When I pulled up I was greeted with a clean California Title, a bill of sale, an original BMW key and a car that looked better than the photos I had been reviewing.

Getting her on the trailer was fun without a clutch or a winch. We tried disconnecting the coil and driving up the trailer ramps with the starter, but that wasn't enough power to make the climb. So I had to drive it up and try to remember to turn off the engine once on the trailer. Things were going swimmingly until the car jerked to a stop with a loud crash! The exhaust (which was attached to the car only at the manifold and the tailpipe) was hanging just a bit too low. We thought it would clear, but just enough of it caught the hard edge of the trailer that it ripped the entire system right at the manifold. We gathered the parts and put them in the truck then gave it another run. This time she sounded like a terrific track runner. I drove it to the top of the trailer so easily that of course I forgot to turn off the motor until I just about drove off the front of the trailer. But I found the key just in time and avoided any more excitement for the day.

In the Shop

Back at the shop we pulled her down and settled her in. We will likely weld the exhaust back to the car so that we can drive her around a bit and have some fun before she's completely disassembled. We also want to weigh the 4 corners of the car with the exhaust in place so that we can design the weight balance of the new system with this in mind.

With the couple snuggled in for the night, I leave you with this little video of how great she sounds with no exhaust.


Sorry, I don't think the YouTube function worked too well for me.

Until next time,

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Today we finally took some tools to the CS. Before we tear it down, we thought we would repair the exhaust and service/adjust the clutch just so that we could run the car some. We will be selling off the entire drive train and wanted to shoot a driving video - running through the gears around town. Once we got the car up and took a deeper look, it was clear that a quick repair wasn’t going to happen. One of the downpipes bends had been pulled out of shape enough that it no longer lined up on each end. The other downpipe had taken a portion of the rear manifold with it. While it is all repairable, we decided that it was too “exhaustive” and time consuming. Any time spent here is going backwards from our actual goal, so we decided to move forward.



Weighing the CS

We want to weigh the four corners of the car so that we have a good basis for our new weight distribution. Our electric motor, batteries, and associated systems will replace an engine, a tranny, drive shaft, differential fuel tank, etc. The weight of our new systems can be equal to the items we remove , depending on the number of batteries we end up using. The minimum number of batteries to achieve the voltage and minimal driving range will weigh a tad less than our current drive train, but additional batteries to increase that range will add to the weight. We are somewhat flexible here, as we are not requiring a 300 mile-range car. We also don’t want to settle for 50 miles. Thus we need to weigh the car now, then weigh it again with it’s drive train removed. We can then begin that engineering. The good news here is that the CS is a fairly light car, weighing around 3100 lbs. It’s current successor can weigh 4500 lbs. Naturally our chassis and suspension is not built to handle that kind of weight, but we certainly do have a bit of room to play with and maintain a fairly light car.



To be economical, we built a pair of scales using some basic parts. Our scales are capable of measuring 600 lbs, so we configured them to measure half-weight. We verified our rig’s half-measurement by weighting an item directly, and then using the scale. Once satisfied, We rolled the front wheels onto the pair, keeping the rear wheels elevated the same amount as our scales. We swapped the scales around a couple of times to verify that the readings were coming back the same. I assume that our final measurements will be off by a very small amount, but certainly within just a few pounds at each wheel which is certainly close enough for our needs.

With a full tank of gas our CS weighs in at:

Front: 1743 lbs. (Drivers 916 lbs, Passenger 827 lbs.)
Rear: 1427 lbs. (Drivers 719 lbs, Passenger 708 lbs.)
Total: 3170 lbs.

Hood Upright Repair

The drivers side hood upright arm had been poorly repaired at least a couple of times and had failed again. We will likely move to a more modern and lightweight approach of gas-charged struts, but for the time-being we figured we should properly fix the stock setup. The sledgehammer that we had been using to prop the hood up has far more important jobs to do.



So that’s it for today. We hope to get in there again next week and have a drivetrain removal party.

Cheers,

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
1974 BMW CSE Progress

Setting Up Shop

https://bmwcse.com/buildblog/2018/10/12/setting-up-shop

Last week was mostly spent setting up the shop. My A/V company has some extra warehouse space so after moving various pallets of amps, speakers, theatrical lighting, we found a nice corner for the project.



We aren’t swimming in money, but we do like the safety and efficiency of a hydraulic lift. It made sense with the amount of fabricating that needs to be done top and bottom, in addition to the typical restoration work.

To save $400 in freight, I opted to pick it up in Los Angeles. Using my short-bed Tundra only half of it hung past the tailgate so wheelies were enjoyed in rush hour traffic on the 405.



Once the lift was setup, we finally got to get a good look under the car. We found various rust repairs that appear to have been performed in decade intervals. I was surprised not to see any duct tape.

This is going to be more fun than we thought!
Finally, we printed out and posted a reminder of the goal on the wall. When we find ourselves elbow-deep in rust, welders, batteries and wires we may risk losing sight of the dream. I assume that a poster will be all it takes to get us back on track :)



Until next time,

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Re: 1974 BMW CSE

Out with the Old

This week we saw our first real milestone: Removing the 3.0 straight-six motor and drive train. It was bittersweet to be sure. It is not lost on me that this (and every) BMW straight six is a beautiful piece of engineering. I have had a number of people remind me that I am ruining a classic combination of coach and motor by converting her to electric.

On that note, last weekend I rode along with a friend on a two-day rally through the Southern California mountains and deserts. In the group were some of my favorite gas-burning vintage cars: Porsche’s, BMWs, Austin Healeys, Triumphs and more. We drove my buddy’s terrific vintage Alfa Sport Sedan. These great cars offer their drivers the enjoyable chore of working the clutches, gears and non-electric steering through the curves and the grades. The feeling returned from this enthusiastic driving is pure joy.

I wanted so badly to take the coupe on this drive before it’s disassembly and restoration, but neither exhaust nor clutch it was pretty much out. All weekend long I kept thinking about what I was giving up by removing the soul of the vintage machinery for the advantages of the electric. But the CSE is to be my daily car. A weekend of smelling like exhaust, fuel and coolant is awesome with a bunch of car guys, but not ideal for a board meeting or date night. I am trying to build something that can give me a slice of the vintage soul in a “scent free” edition, so that I can enjoy it every day.
Out with the Old

Before we strip the car all the way down for it’s proper restoration, we wanted to find out just how much the drive train weighs. The engine, transmission, drive shaft, differential and cooling system weigh far more than our little electric drive unit. But the tank of gas weighs a fraction of our new fuel: Batteries. In order to achieve our goal of 250 miles of range we need quite a few of those heavy beasts. A few posts back we weighed in the coupe in at 3170 lbs. We are hoping that the drive train is a large amount of that weight.

Things got off swimmingly. We started at the rear with fuel tank and the differential. We thought the diff would be maybe 40 pounds or so. We were happy to discover it a beastly 85 lbs! We were off to a good start. We left the half-shafts going to the rear wheels in place as those (or replacements) will connect to the Tesla drive unit. We then removed the drive shaft and the shifter. Finally we unbolted the transmission and motor mounts and lowered the car. We then removed the radiator and anything else involved in making the car go. Everything else stays in for the moment. We drained and properly collected gallons of various liquids, but somehow still had to mop up gallons more. A pesky tie rod that was interfering was just not interested in coming loose. Perhaps we could have pressed her apart, but it was more fun to whip out the grinder. At least we used safety glasses.

After a few careful hours and one forklift, the motor and tranny were safely out of the car and on a pallet for it’s future owner.
What’s the Verdict?

With no drive train our coupe weighs in at:

Front: 1020 lbs. (Drivers 576 lbs, Passenger 444 lbs.)
Rear: 1140 lbs. (Drivers 588 lbs, Passenger 552 lbs.)
Total: 2160 lbs.

Drive train approximate weight: 1010 lbs.

In rough numbers, our Tesla drive unit weighs 295 lbs, and the battery modules weigh 55 lbs each for a minimum of 550 lbs. This brings us to 855 lbs. Add to that the weight of our fabricated mounts, battery enclosures, battery management and charging systems, and it appears that we should be able to end up about the original weight of the coupe. If needed, we still have the option of lighting up other portions of the car such as seats, carbon-fiber hood and more. We are exploring some suspension options that could be lighter and more friendly as well.

Until next time,

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
Re: 1974 BMW CSE

With no drive train our coupe weighs in at:

Front: 1020 lbs. (Drivers 576 lbs, Passenger 444 lbs.)
Rear: 1140 lbs. (Drivers 588 lbs, Passenger 552 lbs.)
Total: 2160 lbs.

Drive train approximate weight: 1010 lbs.
I was surprised that the total for the powertrain came out that high, but inline-sizes are heavy and this is old tech. The large bias to the driver's side is strange - the steering column and pedal cluster shouldn't make that much difference. The diagonal values suggest that the car is not straight, or the springs are unequally sagged... and neither is surprising at this age.

In rough numbers, our Tesla drive unit weighs 295 lbs, and the battery modules weigh 55 lbs each for a minimum of 550 lbs. This brings us to 855 lbs. Add to that the weight of our fabricated mounts, battery enclosures, battery management and charging systems, and it appears that we should be able to end up about the original weight of the coupe. If needed, we still have the option of lighting up other portions of the car such as seats, carbon-fiber hood and more. We are exploring some suspension options that could be lighter and more friendly as well.
Carrying only two-thirds of the Tesla battery does keep that part of the weight down, which is okay if you can live with the shorter range and lower motor power.

I doubt that all of those other bits can be done in 155 pounds, but it might be close. Remember to add a cooling system to your list. The structural changes to mount and drive unit and the body changes to accommodate it will also add weight.

It's very unlikely that you could save any meaningful amount of weight (relative to the total for the vehicle) by changing suspension components, at least at any reasonable cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I very much appreciate your thoughts- so I won't defend myself, but I do have a few thoughts- and I wonder what you think back...

Yes I was happily surprised at the weight. While my scales aren't completely accurate, they are accurate to themselves, and since my first weight was very close to what BMW says the car weights, I know that I am extremely close.

Regarding the LR difference, that inline did lean way into the passenger side, so it makes sense for the amount of difference there- though more than I expected. And with a full tank of gas removed from behind the rear passenger tire (and the spare tire still in) the rear balance made sense to me. I may ditch the spare, but wanted to leave it in for this purpose.

Regarding my 10 module minimum. It is enough to build up the voltage, but true, not nearly the range. Still, the Model S is 4800LBS, and my car 3170. That is fairly significant to the performance and range I should expect. I do hope to get 12 modules in there, but I think my weight to performance ratio will top out about there. 16 modules in a 4800LB car that gives 300 mile range versus 10-12 modules for 3200 pounds and I should beat my 250 mile goal. I had the 70D with 240 miles and I was very happy for everything around So-Cal.

I wonder your thoughts...
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,163 Posts
Hi Jet

I would expect to need MORE power at highway speeds in your BMW - weight is not as important as aerodynamics!

Teslas get 300 miles out of 100 kwh - 3 miles/kwh - my 800 kg Device gets about 28 miles out of 14 kwh - 2 miles/kwh

Your BMW will be a lot better than my Device - but I suspect 10 modules will only give you about 180 miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
Yes I was happily surprised at the weight. While my scales aren't completely accurate, they are accurate to themselves, and since my first weight was very close to what BMW says the car weights, I know that I am extremely close.
I'm not questioning the validity of the measurements - was just surprised by some of the weight information. :)

Regarding the LR difference, that inline did lean way into the passenger side, so it makes sense for the amount of difference there- though more than I expected. And with a full tank of gas removed from behind the rear passenger tire (and the spare tire still in) the rear balance made sense to me. I may ditch the spare, but wanted to leave it in for this purpose.
The engine inclination and fuel tank location would explain a right-side-heavy car, which isn't so bad because it counterbalances a solo driver's weight. They don't explain why the car with no engine or fuel tank and no driver is so left-side-heavy. The spare tire doesn't weigh much compared to the side-to-side bias.

The left-heavy distribution may not be a big deal, and the cause probably doesn't matter, but I think it's worth considering some placement of components toward the right side.

Regarding my 10 module minimum. It is enough to build up the voltage, but true, not nearly the range.
10 modules isn't just 10/16ths of a 16-module Tesla's capacity, it's also 10/16ths of the voltage. You can get Tesla Model S/X modules rewired to 12S (instead of 6S), but if you do that you can only use up to eight of them. Available voltage limits available power at higher speeds; that might not matter to you.

Still, the Model S is 4800LBS, and my car 3170. That is fairly significant to the performance and range I should expect. I do hope to get 12 modules in there, but I think my weight to performance ratio will top out about there. 16 modules in a 4800LB car that gives 300 mile range versus 10-12 modules for 3200 pounds and I should beat my 250 mile goal. I had the 70D with 240 miles and I was very happy for everything around So-Cal.
I understand the logic, but the expectations for range may be high. The Model S is much heavier than the CS, but consumption doesn't just depend on mass. The Model S is also larger, but likely has a much lower coefficient of aerodynamic drag than the CS (which was okay by the standards of the 1960's and early 1970's). Especially at higher speeds, the aero will probably be more important than the weight. Even if the range is only 200 miles, that would be long for a DIY conversion and presumably would be fine for this vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks guys-

I think that we may have landed on a couple of points - Even the Tesla gets less range at freeways speeds. I could never get 240 miles on road trips in my Tesla, but I would easily get that around town. So when I say I am hoping for 250 miles it is mostly certainly around town. Without the Superchargers I used for road trips, this car will certainly not be used for long hauls. Besides, living in L.A. we are lucky to get up to 30MPH on the freeways. So I don't think my 70's aerodynamics are going to hurt me:). So with my 10-12 modules I might be pretty optimistic, but not crazy I don't think.

Great points on all the rest. That is why I am here- to keep learning from you all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
The diagonal values suggest that the car is not straight, or the springs are unequally sagged... and neither is surprising at this age.
A little more detail on this issue...

With a full tank of gas our CS weighs in at:

Front: 1743 lbs. (Drivers 916 lbs, Passenger 827 lbs.)
Rear: 1427 lbs. (Drivers 719 lbs, Passenger 708 lbs.)
Total: 3170 lbs.
The diagonal totals should be the same for a properly set up normal car (not a drag racer or an oval track racer). In this case:
  • left front + right rear = 1624 lb
  • right front + left rear = 1546 lb
That's only 78 pounds difference (2.5% of the total), probably no problem at all.

With no drive train our coupe weighs in at:

Front: 1020 lbs. (Drivers 576 lbs, Passenger 444 lbs.)
Rear: 1140 lbs. (Drivers 588 lbs, Passenger 552 lbs.)
Total: 2160 lbs.
In this case:
  • left front + right rear = 1128 lb
  • right front + left rear = 1032 lb
That's 96 pounds difference, and 4.4% of the total. The car appears to have been set up to handle the offset engine, and will likely need some tweaking after half a ton or more of EV components are added (in different positions from the original powertrain).

It's a relatively small detail, and I'm sure that most builders wouldn't worry about it, but since you have the individual corner weights and are building a car known for handling, it would be a good detail to sort out... eventually.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
A little more detail on this issue...

That's 96 pounds difference, and 4.4% of the total. The car appears to have been set up to handle the offset engine, and will likely need some tweaking after half a ton or more of EV components are added (in different positions from the original powertrain).

It's a relatively small detail, and I'm sure that most builders wouldn't worry about it, but since you have the individual corner weights and are building a car known for handling, it would be a good detail to sort out... eventually.
Brian- thanks for that, I appreciate your details here. My post is from my blog site (which has to appeal to all types of folks- some that just want to follow the project for fun) I didn't get too into the WHY I was weighing the corners. It was certainly to find out exactly where I can be putting in these components. We are literally making bricks of battery modules the same size and weight so that we can insert them and weigh the car with various scenarios.

While this is to be a normal car- not a track car- I do want it to behave extremely well for spirited driving as a car enthusiast.

So I very much welcome your thoughts on this- I am excited to fit in the components in such a way to better the original weight distribution if possible. I will be trying under the rear seats as well as a bit out back- but using the engine compartment for a majority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
... I am excited to fit in the components in such a way to better the original weight distribution if possible. I will be trying under the rear seats as well as a bit out back- but using the engine compartment for a majority.
The car was moderately front-heavy (55%) when stock, partially due to the engine being too far forward; that wasn't bad for the time, is still normal for a non-high-performance car, and shifts rearward with passenger and cargo load (so you don't really want 50%/50% when complete and unloaded).

Without a powertrain, the roller is at only 47% front weight bias (because the boat anchor engine was up front), which is too rearward... but it will shift forward as those battery modules are stacked in the front, because that's best and almost only place to put most of them.

Under the rear seat would be nice, but since the fuel tank wasn't there (unlike a modern vehicle), and the suspension extends under the seat, there isn't a good place to receive big rigid boxes. I would be tempted to replace the rear seat with a substantial battery box under a parcel shelf, since I wouldn't expect to have rear-seat passengers.

The fuel tank and spare tire location is right at the rear, and not great for handling dynamics.

It's going to be an interesting packaging challenge. :D

There are some good drawings for layout planning online, such as those on this website:
BMW E9 CS group 2 (1970)

Another E9 project illustrates what you find when you strip the body down to just the shell, including a not-so-useful space under the rear seat (see the last photo):
BMW E9 – chassis restoration
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
A little more on the space in the rear...

The E9 seems to have the space under the trunk divided down the middle, with the spare tire well on the left and the fuel tank on the right. See the third-from-last image in the restoration link above for illustration. Whatever is left of that space after the Tesla drive unit could be used, but staying to the front of that space would certainly be preferable.

The spare tire well would need to be cut out and replaced with something better shaped for the battery modules. The fuel tank side is just a hole, so a battery box is required to protect the modules from the outside world, to protect the modules from stuff in the trunk on the inside, and to protect interior contents from the effects of severe battery failure. The interior side protection is needed on the spare side, too.

The structural divider between the spare and tank could probably go, but it's worth considering how to effectively replace it, for rear impact strength if nothing else.

The drive unit mass is substantial, and it is centred behind the axle, so you may not want any battery behind it all to avoid to front-heavy mass distribution. It's worth some specific planning and calculation to see what configuration will work.

There is another rear location which could be used for battery modules: the front of the trunk, on that shelf over the axle. It's high (which is bad), but further forward and a usable size and shape. If using that and not the fuel tank space, the fuel tank space could be made into a covered storage cubby to make the remaining trunk more usable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Re: 1974 BMW CSE

Here's another update from the blog. Nothing EV specific yet, but getting closer:)

November was an extremely busy month outside of this project. We only were able to fit in a few half-day sessions on the car, but that was enough time to get her stripped down and sent off to be blasted.

The Hanz and Franz Effect



Since Karmann had coach-built these cars for BMW, we discovered some very interesting peculiarities as we were disassembling. At the risk of sounding insensitive (but with a tribute to Saturday Night Live) we dubbed this the “Hanz and Frans” approach to building cars.

The best we can tell, Hanz was responsible for the driver’s side, while Frans assembled the passenger side. Where Hanz would use a 5mm phillips screw to attach a bracket, Frans would use a 6mm hex bolt to attach the same bracket on his side. One might argue that this was not the case - instead attributing it to 44 years of repair work done by various people. Probably so. We prefer to imagine Hanz and Frans starting the day with a good strength workout, putting down plenty of sausage, then getting to work assembling the car each using whatever bin of fasteners they had handy.



The Quality and Design

On the other hand, it was equally fascinating to discover some wonderful engineering and design. The dash for example. While it appears to be robust component, it is instead a series of small layered assemblies. The steel of the dash frame forms the entirety of the shape. Wonderfully high grade plywood forms the dash trim pieces themselves, and 44 years later, they are still in terrific condition.

We bagged, tagged, binned, and categorized every part on the car. So many trim pieces are in terrific shape and can go right back on, while so many more will be cleaned, straightened, polished, painted, wrapped, powdered, or chromed.



We had great fun cutting away every bit of wiring in the car. One buddy that dropped by left in horror wondering how we were planning to recreate the wiring harness. We could hear him yelling as he drove off “So long suckas- have fun putting that back together!”

We wanted to start fresh with the wiring for a few reasons: First, none of the wiring that had to do with the gas motor will apply. Second, we want to modernize how the lights and windows are powered. No longer does every light, motor and switch require several wires running to it. We will be running LEDS for nearly every light, so fewer, smaller gauge wires can be ran to just about everything. Finally, we need to account for the 12v side of the EV systems. For the combination of these reasons, we want to design an entirely new wiring schematic. The goal is that it will look like we bought and installed a modern factory wiring harness.

Off to the Blaster



Finally, she was ready to head to the blasting shop. We agonized about removing the suspension and fabricating a dolly for her, but in the end we opted to send her off on her own tires. We will remove the suspension when she returns and finish grinding and sanding those last sections ourselves before we begin the metalwork.

We can’t wait to see her return as bare metal. We have new floors and frame rails ready to weld in along with a number of other areas which we will better evaluate when the paint is off.

Until next time!

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
A little more on the space in the rear...

The E9 seems to have the space under the trunk divided down the middle, with the spare tire well on the left and the fuel tank on the right. See the third-from-last image in the restoration link above for illustration..
Hi Brian,
Thanks for all that. Yeah, as we were stripping her down we began to so some basic imagining of these locations. It seems certain that we should be able to get a couple of modules under the rear seats. We do figure to stack 2-3 rows high in the front engine compartment, but want to leave enough space for an A/C unit and other items. We removed the large vacuum unit for the brakes and will provide electric power for that to free up more space.

Perhaps when the car comes back clean I might take a batch of photos at even angles and draw in to scale some of these ideas. Love to hear what you and the others have to say based on those. Clearly you might have reasons why some of my ideas wouldn't work, and that is exactly what I am looking for with this group!

Thanks again!

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Depending on your motor weight, you might get a better weight distribution by locating the spare wheel under the bonnet/hood, and using both halves of the under-trunk space for batteries. You'll definitely shift the CoG downwards.
 
1 - 20 of 101 Posts
Top