[h20ham]

Great 2022
Looking for comments on Ford’s Eluminator motor in a Lotus 7.
I live in the middle of nowhere, so shipping a questionable crashed Leaf or or something has never really interested me. Also live where they put salt on the roads so some have too much corrosion starting.

I understand the Eluminator needs some beefy mounts, doesnt come with everything. Seems to me, for a fairly good quality new unit, not so bad?

 

[remy_martian]

I'm looking into one for my C5 and might even use one in the Gen 5 Camaro SS. Need to find a good axle maker for these, so if anyone has recommends....

Shipping is to the dealer or can be to a freight terminal if not buying from the parts department. I'm 20 minutes to the grocery store, have my own forklift, yet Fedex's computer billing still hits me with a residential surcharge out here 🤬

The parts department has the inverter, but it's undocumented AFAIK. Looking at Sandy Monroe's horrible teardown (more verbal than physical abuse as a "teardown" in that video...maybe some bad attitude because he used to work for Ford?), the inverter is such a messy assembly that I think it's good it doesn't come with the drive unit. If it was documented as far as CAN command, maybe.

The mounts aren't any more beefy than what's needed for the diff on any ~300HP electric car build. It's from Borg-Warner, a top tier supplier (yes, even for the first Tesla Roadster, fanboys), so quality should not be an issue.

 

[brian_]

Looking for comments on Ford’s Emulator motor...

Just to make it easier for people to find this thread, and for people interested in the drive unit to find more information, I'll note that it's call "Eluminator", not "Emulator".

 

[brian_]

The mounts aren't any more beefy than what's needed for the diff on any ~300HP electric car build. It's from Borg-Warner, a top tier supplier (yes, even for the first Tesla Roadster, fanboys), so quality should not be an issue.

I agree - it takes the same reaction torque around the axle shaft axis as the final drive in any IRS of the same output, and it takes no propeller shaft (driveshaft) reaction torque. The mounts do need to hold the up the weight of the entire unit, which is much greater than that of just a final drive.

 

[brian_]

I'm looking into one for my C5 and might even use one in the Gen 5 Camaro SS. Need to find a good axle maker for these, so if anyone has recommends...

The Mach-E appears to use a common tripod inboard and Rzeppa or Birfield type outboard joints; the plunge travel would then all be provided by the inboard joint. It appears that the C5 and later Corvettes are the same. I suppose the key would be to find the spline specs for the tripod joint to see if a custom axle shaft (bar) can be made - splined to your car's outboard joints on the outer end and the Mach-E tripod joints on the inboard end and whatever length suits the components and desired track width - to use the CV joints of the car and drive unit without modification. Of course replacement parts from Ford are just complete axle assemblies (and replacement boots) so they're not useful sources of details. Maybe just buy a dead axle shaft from a wrecker (core/scrap value) and take it apart to see?

Looking for Corvette examples I noticed that GForce Performance Engineering offers axle assemblies using aftermarket joints (108 mm "930" style, presumably plunging inboard and non-plunging outboard) and Corvette-specific stub shafts flanged to work with them, and custom-length axle shafts (bars). Since they also offer similar shafts for the (real) Mustang, they could presumably mix-and-match inboard Ford and outboard GM parts. It's unlikely that the Mach-E drive unit uses stub shafts interchangeable with the Mustang, but it might be worth asking if they do or if there is an available fix.

The same parts mix-and-match exercise, perhaps with custom-built axle shaft bars, can potentially work in many situations.

In his Westfalia T3 with Chevy Bolt drivetrain, Yabert modified the inboard tripod joints with integral stub axles to become flanged stub axles to work with the same type of CV joints used by GForce. Some vendors (including Zero EV) offer flanged stub shafts for Tesla transaxles that work with the same style of CV joints, and someone could custom-machine similar stubs for the Mach-E (but tooling that up for one project would be unreasonably expensive). That approach could be used to convert the Mach-E to work with aftermarket axle shaft assemblies.

 

[brian_]

Looking for comments on Ford’s Emulator motor in a Lotus 7.

What rear hub assemblies would you be using? Presumably this is a Lotus 7 style vehicle (a Caterham 7, or something just inspired by the design), rather than an actual Lotus 7 which came with a live beam axle in the rear.

 

[h20ham]

Eluminator, thanks. I have built the first chassis for a solid “live”, the body is designed for independent, or more space as I figured modifications would be needed in the future. I was/am still planning a gas for the first attempt, as I like the idea of a motorcycle engine/trans. The ultimate is the electric, done right.
I am more concerned with quality and longevity, than anything to do with speed. The reason the 7 appeals (caterham/vt) is its very changeable, or one can add space or move things. Albeit the light weight nature of this car, and the summer top down, also the looks is what appeals to me.

One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.
A negative about the Ford is the brake, but…the front drive motor is likely sufficient for a lighter car so maybe that s the answer. I dont think the front is on offer yet, maybe Ford will release the package soon as they are seeing what’s happening in UK and USA.

Haven’t considered batteries or capacitors or both too much, really like the idea of a combination of the two. But that may be over the top.

 

[h20ham]

What rear hub assemblies would you be using? Presumably this is a Lotus 7 style vehicle (a Caterham 7, or something just inspired by the design), rather than an actual Lotus 7 which came with a live beam axle in the rear.

Thanks Brian, haven’t really considered it. I am sure, like you mention. Used or…doubt I am the first person to need/want them though! I also know space will be tight, which is why my 1st is going to be a bunch wider, and easy to modify. From memory, the Eluminator (thanks again!) is 22inch. So probably not too much travel in the rear, might need limiting straps or something, then again, might be just enough.

All very preliminary, though I suspect it is close to the right thing.

 

[brian_]

Thanks Brian, haven’t really considered it. I am sure, like you mention. Used or…doubt I am the first person to need/want them though! I also know space will be tight, which is why my 1st is going to be a bunch wider, and easy to modify. From memory, the Eluminator (thanks again!) is 22inch. So probably not too much travel in the rear, might need limiting straps or something, then again, might be just enough.

All very preliminary, though I suspect it is close to the right thing.

Yes, this is a coaxial drive unit so the outputs are spaced very widely, leaving little length for half-shafts in a narrow car, which could be a problem for wheel travel.

 

[h20ham]

Yes, 20inches on either end is not much. Maybe I need to run the tyres at 30psi. Or…?

 

[remy_martian]

One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.

It doesn't. Unlike an ICE that reduces fuel consumption when run at max pumping efficiency RPM, an electric is happy at high RPM. There is a sweet spot, but it's not low is good.

On my C5, it'd lope at 1500 RPM in 6th and get 31MPG. Electric, it'll be running about 6600 rpm, lol. Because...torque multiplication.

The Eluminator weighs about the same as a live beam axle, I'm guessing, as it's 205lb.

 

[brian_]

One point for using a manual transmission, is the ability to select neutral. Also likely gearing to save high revs on the motor, which no doubt reduces energy use.

I understand that people want a neutral, but I'm not sure why it is considered important. No production EV with a single-ratio transmission has a neutral, and even the two-speeds don't necessarily have one.

The optimal speed for motor efficiency depends on load. It won't be the high-speed end of the motor's operating range, but it won't the be the low-speed end, either. Shifting to stay out of low-speed/high-load situations would probably save more energy than avoiding the extreme high-speed/low-load situation.

 

[SMS]

Had a Birkin which is a Lotus 7 S3 like a Caterham. Weighed 1,167 lb wet and had 242 hp at the rear wheels. It was also as aerodynamic as a brick, lift off at 100mph and it feels like you hit the brakes. With the added weight due to the battery and the air resistance sucking up the juice not sure a Se7en would be the most fun EV.

 

[remy_martian]

You don't need a lot of battery in a 1200 pound car or in a car that you'll run for an hour

As far as aero, if you're running on roads 50-80 mph is plenty of fun and will get you killed, no problem. My C5 pens out to 91 top speed (At 160, the noise level was unpleasant), but it did 1G in corners with no aero mods...couple that with a 0-60 below 3s with electric and tell me you can't have any more fun than that with your pants on.

NO

ADDED

WEIGHT

A purist would not mod a classic - that's what restomod is all about (my constraint is stock weight and balance and aero/widebody gets tacky awfully easily on a good looking classic), whereas someone pushing tech can easily solve the aero problems a brick poses. Just keeping air from going under the car makes a world of difference, as does how it exits from underneath it.

 

[h20ham]

Building, 1st frame ready (ice engine), molds ready (Caterham or 10inches longer) and wider with more room for independent. And when a good, large company like Ford offers a crate that will fit and work. I will tweak the molds if necessary, and I will make some for my brothers and sisters. Mom and dad say they are too old for one, though dad still drives his 05 Elise so you never know.

 

[SMS]

Understand the desire for a crate motor drop in. If for driving on the street an Eluminator might be a bit of overkill. Many 7 owners are very happy with Kent motors and an electric motor with similar power would be lighter and your tire budget would be much lower. When you wrote about the Eluminator I was thinking you were building a track car.
Elise 1,975 lbs, 190hp
Birkin, 1,200 lbs
Kent motor 242 lbs, about 100hp
Eluminator, 205 lbs, 281hp
AC-51, 150lbs, 80hp

 

[brian_]

Elise 1,975 lbs, 190hp
Birkin, 1,200 lbs

Kent motor 242 lbs, about 100hp
Eluminator, 205 lbs, 281hp
AC-51, 150lbs, 80hp

Good numbers to have, but the weights need some context. The Kent engine needs a transmission and final drive, the AC-51 electric motor needs a final drive and possibly some additional reduction gearbox (usually a multi-speed transmission), and the Eluminator EV drive unit is complete with reduction gearing and final drive. And of course the electric motors are useless without a battery (plus an inverter, charger, etc) which will weigh substantially more than the motor, and much more than the engine's full fuel tank.

Assuming that the sevenesque car ends up almost as heavy as an Elise after conversion, the Eluminator is more powerful than required but something better than an AC-51 would certainly be desirable.

An advantage of any complete EV drive it is that it can install entirely in the back (with an independent suspension - an important qualifier), leaving the original engine space for battery.

 

[h20ham]

It also depends on super/ultra capacitors. Still in its infancy, but. I do fancy capacitors. Hoping for 70-80 mile range.
Even though the Eluminator is 280hp, is there a need to use it all?
While I would likely prefer the Front Eluminator, its not offered as of yet.

 

[SMS]

the Eluminator EV drive unit is complete with reduction gearing and final drive.

Had not considered that the Eluminator included the reduction gearing and final drive. That does make a difference. To me the fun of a 7 was always the light weight. Amazing how you can brake so late and trow it into a corner.

Need to change my thinking of what the 7 was like to what my Zero is like, all inclusive.

Hoping for 70-80 mile range.
Even though the Eluminator is 280hp, is there a need to use it all?

With such poor aerodynamics you will need a lot of energy to have such a long range.
You will not need to use it all. My 7 had close to the same hp and about half the torque of the Eluminator when it was a track car. On the street it was not a lot of fun. Now some of this was due to it being an ICE car. I had to tip toe around corners and taking off. De tuned it quite a bit. My buddy that had a very similar car with a Kent in it had a better street car and in many ways track car. On the track he almost never had to lift as the car handled so well and could take corners that fast. On the street flooring it would not get you into trouble and just putting around was still a kick in the pants. Keep in mind compared with an Elise a 7 is lower, lighter, narrower, and you steer it with the throttle, wheel, brakes, and your butt

What may be a big difference is that the ICE motor had power and troque curves and an electric motor can be programed so it may be much easier to drive an EV se7en. It did take me some time to get used to my Zero. Still miss the clutch in some slow speed maneuvers.

 

[remy_martian]

You will be weight constrained, so will be making a lot less HP with the Eluminator. That's where you're wise to wait for the smaller, even lighter, drive unit. The small front motor should be available from the parts department, not Ford Performance. Did you ask?

You also need to trade acceleration for top speed when making the battery pack. You won't get both and keep the weight constrained.

Supercaps are bullshit unless you want to pit every lap for a charge, lol.