Just thought I'd share the motor adapter I have designed to adapt the Nissan Leaf motor to the Netgain Warp9 bolt pattern to use the popular transmission adapter plates. In my case I am adapting it to my Honda Civic transmission. I am still working on the shaft coupler, which will be based on a cut down Nissan Leaf transmission input shaft bolted to a clutch disc center hub.
Nissan Leaf motor adapter
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
![20171005_193634[1].jpg](/d1/attachments/85/85674-9616d2fe5fc70e0a900b60e87f96050a.jpg)
![20171005_194414[1].jpg](/d1/attachments/85/85682-557051ed23ec2dd6ab174e1efa268088.jpg)
That looks very nice. Any chance you would post the dimensions here so others can follow in your footsteps?
I was going to remind you that the Leaf input shaft is just a slip fit until I reread and understood what you were planning there. I think using just the shaft and the clutch center should work fine. That's essentially what I'm going to do. I'm hoping to get a lot done on the drivetrain this next week and should have a few pictures to post.
B
I was going to remind you that the Leaf input shaft is just a slip fit until I reread and understood what you were planning there. I think using just the shaft and the clutch center should work fine. That's essentially what I'm going to do. I'm hoping to get a lot done on the drivetrain this next week and should have a few pictures to post.
B
Here are some 2D drawings.
I could get more made. I paid ~$450 for one (including shipping), but the price could come down quite a bit for higher quantities. It seems expensive, but seeing as I only spent $500 for the motor, the total cost is still way lower than a comparative DiY AC motor like HPEVS or Netgain Hyper9.
I could get more made. I paid ~$450 for one (including shipping), but the price could come down quite a bit for higher quantities. It seems expensive, but seeing as I only spent $500 for the motor, the total cost is still way lower than a comparative DiY AC motor like HPEVS or Netgain Hyper9.
Thanks for sharing the drawing.
If I understand this adapter correctly, the four almost equally spaced holes with 3/8-24 threads are to emulate the common motor face, making the Leaf motor fit as if it were a standard face-mounted motor (of some particular size). In a quick search, it appears that the face-mounted motors have four equally spaced holes on various pitch circle diameters (depending on frame size); however, the adapter drawing shows three holes each 4.05" in one axis and 1.08" in the other axis from the centre (which would be about 8.383" PCD, or perhaps is supposed to be 8-3/8"?), and one hole (the top one in the drawing) which is 4.09" in one axis and 0.92" in the other axis from the centre. The oddball top hole is on the same PCD (within a couple thousandths of an inch), but is not regularly spaced with the others.
Shouldn't the mounting holes of a standard (presumably NEMA standard) face mounting be equally spaced? Is the CanEV adapter irregular like this?
Thanks!
A freind and I clamped my motor down in his vertical machining center and took some measurements yesterday. I was going to match them up with these out of curiosity and discovered that Nissan must have changed the motor and transaxle housing significantly between generations. I have a 2015 and the threaded holes and through holes are on opposite sides of faceplate and in different locations.
As soon as I'm back home and at my computer, I will post a picture and a drawing with the numbers we got.
Bill
As soon as I'm back home and at my computer, I will post a picture and a drawing with the numbers we got.
Bill
Joined
·
117 Posts
This is some good stuff! Thanks for starting this thread. Unfortunately as much as I would love to say sign me up for one right now, I too have a different housing on my 2014 motor.
I've been going through some employment changes so the attention has been lacking on the car. Hope to get back to it soon!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've been going through some employment changes so the attention has been lacking on the car. Hope to get back to it soon!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I assume that in the comparison photo the new version (starting with 2013, I think) is on the left. While the old one looks easier to package and mount, the change makes sense because the new version of the drive assembly integrates the inverter more closely with the motor: at the far end of the new motor the oval port can be seen where the conductors from inverter plug directly into motor - no cables.
The change is good for the Leaf, and not so good for some other applications of the motor.
I found a YouTube teardown of a 2013 Leaf unit, and the left image in the comparison looks like that 2013. You can see the inverter being unplugged from the motor in the video... which I only fast-forwarded through. If you want to be either amused or infuriated (or both) have a look at the comments - the amount of ignorance and stupidity is astounding.
Part of this last week was spent getting accurate positions for the holes on the 2015 (2nd Gen) Leaf motor. We clamped the motor on end in a vertical machining center and used a dial indicator on the spindle, precision ground pins in the holes, and the DRO on the machine to grab the numbers accurate to .0001". the drawing only shows .001" precision, though.
The only thing that confuses me at the moment is that the center point for the dimensions and the center of the motor shaft are not at the same point. I sent an email to my friend but I think he's traveling this week. I have noted both points on the attached drawing and it should be an easy matter to make that motor hole with sufficient clearance.
The reason the holes and cross marks don't appear dead center in the picture is that I had to stretch and rotate the image to get it that close. The picture is an inaccurate representation of the actual alignment. But it gives you all an idea of how it looks.
We did the same thing with the bellhousing for the Toyota W58 transmission but I will put that info in my build thread.
Enjoy.
Bill
The only thing that confuses me at the moment is that the center point for the dimensions and the center of the motor shaft are not at the same point. I sent an email to my friend but I think he's traveling this week. I have noted both points on the attached drawing and it should be an easy matter to make that motor hole with sufficient clearance.
The reason the holes and cross marks don't appear dead center in the picture is that I had to stretch and rotate the image to get it that close. The picture is an inaccurate representation of the actual alignment. But it gives you all an idea of how it looks.
We did the same thing with the bellhousing for the Toyota W58 transmission but I will put that info in my build thread.
Enjoy.
Bill
Attachments
How did you determine "the center point for the dimensions"? I see the mark - red in the drawing and a yellow point in the annotations on the photo - and I understand that it is the reference point for all dimensions, but I don't understand how you chose it, or why you expect it to correspond to the shaft centre. Is it just a weighted average location of those bolt holes?
The bolt holes are not in a simple circle, and are generally offset toward the side of the transmission case which includes the differential and outputs - that makes structural sense. If you're looking at this motor as if it were mounted to the Toyota transmission - with everything centred in a line down the centre of the Supra - it would not be obvious why it is "lopsided", but remember that the case of this motor is designed for mounting transversely, with the transmission output offset to the rear of the motor (which is the right-hand side of the photo and drawings). It's not surprising that the fasteners are offset the same way. As a result, the adapter plate will stick out to the right side of the motor and Toyota transmission more than to the left side.
To me, it seems like all of the dimensions should be adjusted to use the shaft centre as the dimensional reference point: subtract 0.170" from all vertical dimensions and add 1.080" to all horizontal dimensions. That would likely make it easier when you get to the transmission side, since presumably all bellhousing dimensions will be defined relative to the transmission input shaft centre.
I don't know why everything is offset that way. When we were taking the measurements, we centered on the shaft as the origin. Somehow, though, when I entered the numbers into my CAD program (DesignCAD 3D Max v25), the origin had moved according to the picture I included. We did the same steps for the transmission housing but on a standard mill with DRO and those numbers are still centered on the input shaft.
I emailed those questions to the friend whose equipment was used and who did the actual measuring, but he is traveling this week so I don't expect to hear anything for awhile. As soon as I get this figured out I will come back and update the drawings.
Also, unfortunately the numbers for the motor centerline are my best guess based on how closely I could line up the holes on the picture to the holes on the drawing. I wouldn't trust them too much unless you're okay with something like +/- 0.1" accuracy.
Bill
Joined
·
117 Posts
Well my current adapter, which k have yet to test was made by yours truly with a sharpie and a drill press. So I'll take that 0.1 accuracy!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So it sounds like it was just a glitch during import. I'm not familiar with the specific software, but it sounds like it shifted to a centre which is just the middle of the entered points. As long as you still have the original data, you have the shaft location.
Joined
·
117 Posts
Bill,
Did you ever get a chance to correct this shaft location/ center point in a CAD file? With your permission I'd like
to go ahead and pull the trigger on having a test template made for the motor end. If you have had success or
Confidence, this would save me some
Time.
It may be beneficial to make the adapter mate to a common Style
Motor adapter like from Canadian EV or Something.
Let me know, maybe I can be the guinea pig.
Thanks!
Danny
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Strangely enough, I haven't heard from my friend, so no, nothing is corrected. I'll try again soon. But in the meantime, the only reason I wouldn't use the numbers, as is, is due to possible alignment issues with the two shafts. If you aren't using dowel pins, that concern is less since you can tweak the alignment at assembly time.
Not that you really need it, but you have my permission to do anything you want with this info. As far as I am concerned, it is public domain.
Bill
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!