[brian_]

This sounds like an interesting project, and could work well. I don't have any advice, and with no questions or problems presented yet there's nothing to help with... but I have questions:

Will the Bolt drive unit (motor plus transaxle) will fit into the T3's structure and under the floor? The motor is concentric with the axle, but the reduction gear housing sticks up substantially.

Where is the battery going? In the stock box it is long and wide and wouldn't fit anywhere except in the interior as a huge box of cargo. Are the modules to be re-arranged to be stacked behind the axle in the engine area?

This is, I believe, an image of the bottom of a VW T3 (with the van's rear to the left in the image):
http://www.westfalia.gomez-perales.com/Images/jackpoints.jpg

 

[brian_]

My only question at the moment is to know if there is a better place than DiyEcar to start a build thread or if this one is still relevant.

I don't know where else would be more suitable for a DIY EV conversion build thread than DIYElectricCar, and I won't see it if it goes elsewhere (which of course doesn't matter to anyone else).

The forum's future was looking pretty shaky, but seems to be stable for now and I assume that anyone writing a build thread would keep a copy of everything themselves, so they could re-post elsewhere if necessary.

 

[brian_]

About the Bolt motor, my understanding at the moment is that the reduction gear housing don't sticks up, but the protrusion is facing the front of the car.

https://www.motortrend.ca/en/news/2017-chevrolet-bolt-ev-drivetrain-first-look-review/

Interesting. I've seen quite a few images of the Bolt motor and transaxle, but not in the vehicle; it is usually displayed with the reduction gear housing upward, but apparently that's not the operating position. That video is a really nice presentation.

Having the housing protruding forward will help with floor clearance, although that might not have been an issue in the T3 anyway.

The video shows an "electronic precision shift system", which is hilarious, given that the transaxle doesn't shift. Like other typical modern EV transaxles, is a single-ratio design, so the system is just the switch lever and the electrically-engaged parking pawl.

 

[brian_]

Are you planning one of these

https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/hybrid-hot-rod-2-0-pria-ghia-36697.html.

That's a 180-post thread, and no indication in the first or last pages whether the thing actually got built or not. It's not worth it for each of us to spend an hour to read the whole thing to find out. Do you have a link to a specific post (or page) showing the result?

The guy above can do body swaps to Prii skateboards in a few months normally which if I ever do it it will be how I approach the issue.

The Prius doesn't have a "skateboard" structure, and neither does any Tesla; it's unfortunate the Tesla people incorrectly used this term. Cutting away the roof of a Prius leaves a lot more than a skateboard and yet destroys the structure, so the "rebody" project must replace the structure.


The driver and front passenger sit over the front wheels in a T3 (and earlier VW vans); it seems unlikely that the Bolt's packaging of components would work for the T3, even if one were willing to get a front-wheel-drive van out the project.

 

[brian_]

Few pics from the Bolt...

In the last photo a jackstand is holding up the car by supporting the middle of the control arm. I strongly advise not to do that; the arm is not designed to take vertical load at all, and particularly not there. Even if you're not going to use the control arm, it's just not sound. I would directly support the vehicle structure somewhere; at the control arm pivot mounts would likely be fine.

I assume that the plan is to use just the drive unit (motor and transaxle) - at the rear of course - in a custom subframe with the original VW suspension... so none of the Bolt suspension parts will be used. Perhaps they can be sold to recover some of the cost of the project, if they are not damaged. On the other hand, there may be no market for them yet (since the car is so new).

 

[brian_]

https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-...228-5d084ff6-ad33-4e75-8b92-ab4541ccb7be.jpeg

Thanks

He is in the final stages of fit up, once bodies are matched up limousine style he will weld and structurally finish it off then start replacing doors, trim and interior

I think that's very far from the final stage of anything, but I suppose the front and rear clips are in place. As it is, the windshield won't work (even a custom windshield couldn't have a reasonable shape without substantially modifying the frame shape) and the doors will be far too short.

Assuming that the Type 14 Karmann Ghia has the same wheelbase as a Type 1, it's 2,400 mm (94.5 in). That's significantly shorter than even the shortest Prius (the first generation), at 2,550 mm (100.4 in). This is why there is an awkward gap in what has been cobbled together. Although front wheel drive is really unfortunate for an old VW (and would be bad for the T3), and arguably even worse for a classic pickup truck, a truck has an advantage in being easily stretched or shrunk in the cargo box area. Any vehicle combination also has a problem in matching the front axle to driver's position dimension.

A T3-on-Bolt would be even worse, due to the wheelbase mismatch (2,600 mm and 102.4" for the Bolt, and only 2,461 mm or 96.9" for the T3) and and a mechanically more challenging mismatch in driver's position. Fortunately, that's not the plan for this project.

The end result will be stronger and safer than the original Ghia with the front crumple zone and drivers airbag intact.
What Ghia do you know of that has traction control and an airbag?
Here is an older video of the tub driving around
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wJwypgZQWS0

I wouldn't leave a live airbag in anything that far from the vehicle for which the airbag was designed.
Driving around is very different from being structurally sound, but I realize that this is an unfinished stage and just demonstrates that everything functional come from the Prius.

Traction control would be good, and could be had without using any of the powertrain donor's body structure... although I don't know if anyone has done it.

 

[brian_]

Getting polluting antiques with rusted out floorboards couple into rolled Prii breathing new life into both is something I hope to see expand.

Prius hybrid or Bolt EV, I agree that this can be a good thing.

 

[brian_]

I have heard that if the airbags deploy the car gets insurance totaled.

Vehicles are declared a total loss when repair costs exceed the value (after salvage recovery) of the vehicle. When airbags deploy there is usually quite a bit of damage (including the expensive airbags and their installation), so it's not surprising that those vehicles are often declared a total loss... but it's not simply a rule that airbags deployed means totalled.

 

[brian_]

Actually, by law, some places it's more aggressive than that.

For example, "2/3" is often the rule. $3000 car has $2000 of damage or more, it's done.

Perhaps, but a $3000 car which has $2000 of damage is a total loss anyway, because there is salvage value in the damaged car, and administering the repair (including a rental car in many cases), so the net cost to the insurance company would likely exceed the replacement value of the vehicle.

At the other extreme, pop an airbag on a Ferrari and see if they just write it off and toss the car in the scrap pile... not likely.

A 2/3rds value rule sounds like just an insurance guideline (rather than a law), and whatever rules some state might have about titles, an airbag deployment event seems very unlikely to cause a vehicle's control system to commit computer suicide and be unrecoverable. There will be a reset procedure, and that's what Yabert is looking for.

 

[brian_]

Not needed - the power steering...

I can see that the Bolt's power steering might not be needed to keep the Bolt drivetrain bits working, but what's the plan for steering boost?

 

[brian_]

The only things I would add: DOM doesnt have a tight callout for straightness, so inspect your piece.

If I recall correctly, cold drawn seamless mechanical tubing would be more likely to be true than drawn over mandrel... and it is actually seamless. This presumably won't be inexpensive, but you don't need much.

 

[brian_]

As you can see below, the first shaft on my Smart was rework using rosette type welding and it fail after few thousand kilometers.
After I reworked the shaft with a complete weld around the tubes and it's what move my Smart today after many thousand of kilometers (3e pic).

Is it the same tubing? The rosette-welded tube appears to have been very brittle and cracked through the holes for the rosette welds. I suppose avoiding the rosette weld holes avoids that problem, but I'm sure either the material or the heat treatment is wrong if this failure occurs.

Welding in a ring around a shaft or tube can be a problem, leading to the shaft shearing off at the weld; this is one reason that tubing is fishmouthed or diagonally cut in the article linked above.

 

[brian_]

Hmmmm, makes me wonder whether I should even tell the insurance company. None of the safety stuff is compromised so I don't know why they should be so strict.

It's one thing to avoid providing unnecessary information, but another thing entirely to falsely answer questions such as "is the vehicle modified". It would be bad if you got insurance, but later found that the coverage was not valid when you needed it.

It doesn't matter whether or not a technically competent person considers the vehicle's safety to be uncompromised; if you don't follow the terms of the insurance service, you risk not having insurance.

 

[brian_]

The most challenging part will be to find another brake fluid reservoir or modified the original Bolt reservoir.
It need to fit under the cluster and don't touch it (in blue on the picture).
Do someone have advice to weld / fix a Chevy Bolt plastic reservoir to ''any other'' plastic reservoir?

Rather than modifying the Bolt reservoir, can you find or assemble tube fittings which will insert and seal into the master cylinder ports, for hoses leading to a remote reservoir or as adapters to a custom reservoir? Remote reservoirs are often used in race cars, but their master cylinders typically have different styles of reservoir port so their hardware probably won't work directly.

 

[brian_]

Is someone know the load rating of the chevy Bolt front hub?

The Bolt uses the latest version of GM's Gamma platform, with earlier versions used by the Chevrolet Spark, Sonic, Trax, and others. Unfortunately, the Bolt is among the heaviest of the vehicles on the platform, so the components may not have much more capacity than required by the Bolt.

The most conservative estimate would simply be to assume that the hub capacity corresponds to the gross axle weight rating for the front axle of the vehicle. That's shown on the placard on the driver's door edge or frame, and is likely between 1022 kg / 2253 lb and 1013 kg / 2234 depending on year and possibly trim level. They are very unlikely to have changed the hubs, so the higher values probably apply to all Bolt hubs and hub carriers... the springs might vary.

The Trax apparently has front GAWR which can be a bit higher: in a quick search (of for-sale ads which include an image of the loading placard) I'm seeing 1065 kg / 2348 lb. It seems very unlikely that the Trax has a different hub or bearings, so the Trax numbers could be assumed.

I would like to replace the rear bearing housing (part 7) and put a disc brake on the Vanagon. The Vanagon rear bearings are one 35x75 ball bearing and one 35x62 roller bearing. My bet is the roller bearing can take a lot of weight and replace it by the double row angular contact ball bearing from the Bolt hub couldn't be enough for a Vanagon Westfalia...

I agree that the VWs rear GAWR will be higher than that of the Bolt. One source (Roadhaus) reports for 1984-1991:

• 2WD Vanagon or Camper: GAWR Rear 2866 lbs
• 4WD Syncro Vanagon or Camper GAWR Rear 3042 lbs

The same source has a table of Vehicle Actual Loaded Weight for various years and variants, and all rear GAWR are substantially higher than the Bolt front GAWR.

With any luck, the Bolt components have lots of capacity margin. If you find the same bearings used in another model with a higher GAWR, that would be a good indication.

 

[brian_]

I have seen the T3 loaded up to way over the recommended rates and used for off road and with over sized wheels too. Seldom has the rear bearings come up as a source of frustration.

Which is why using the front Bolt bearings instead of those proven T3 rear bearings could be a concern...

 

[brian_]

Things are going forwards and I have now a rough 3D model of the Vanagon and the Bolt components (60 kWh battery, motor, power electronic).

Excellent!

With only electronics behind the drive unit, and the battery roughly centred in the wheelbase, the mass distribution of the electric powertrain will be much further forward than the original powertrain. That's good for avoiding overloading of the rear axle, but not so good for traction or front axle load. Do you have an idea yet of how the distribution will work out?

 

[brian_]

I've ordered few laser cut parts to fix the wheel speed sensors (in black on pic) close to the transmission output shafts. I will have the choice to fix 4 sensor on one shaft or the two passager side sensors on one side and the two driver side sensors on the other. No sensor on front wheels.
I will also fix the chevy Bolt wheel bearing seals containing the 96 magnets for the ABS on a shaft collar I will fix on transmission output shaft.

I assume that the "magnets for the ABS" are for the "wheel speed sensors", and while these sensors are normally at the front hubs (in a Bolt), you are placing them at the inboard end of the shafts, and of course at the rear. Presumably they are needed for the Bolt's ABS / taction control / stability control logic, but ABS won't actually be implemented. Since the logic is still active, if both sets of sensors are installed on the same side, wouldn't there be a possible issue with control if one wheel spins, or even in tight turns, since they are supposed to be providing the two separate wheel speeds?

The logic knows what the average of the two driven wheel speeds should be (because that average is directly proportional to the motor speed), so when one output shaft goes faster than the other the average with the sensors all on the same side will conflict with the motor speed. Maybe the Bot logic ignores that...

It's interesting that the Bolt system will apparently run happily with no speed input from the other two wheels, but needs the driven wheel speeds.

 

[brian_]

It's interesting that the Bolt system will apparently run happily with no speed input from the other two wheels, but needs the driven wheel speeds.

And it's why I plan to put sensors in pair at each side of the transmission output.

It looks like I misunderstood an important detail, as the plan from the beginning was to put two sensors - which I now understand to be for the Bolt's front and rear wheels - on each side. Still, it ran on just the front wheel sensors...

My bet is that is design to run the car on a dyno / test the car without driving around.

With only the two font wheels speed sensors, the car start to reduce power at 40 km/h.
I added the 4 wheel speed sensors on the same output (pic) and I can accelerate without problem.

The dyno test at the end of the production line is one scenario, but I suspect that in general the wrong speed (due to missing the sensors) for the non-driven axle is acceptable at low speeds (but only at low speed) for all of the vehicle dynamics management systems: traction control, ABS, and stability control.

With the sensors for front and rear axles linked together, the car will never appear to spin its tires or lock up the brakes on one axle, keeping much of the dynamic control happy. The relative wheel speeds won't be quite right in a turn (the outside axles will go faster as they should, but the fronts won't go faster than the rears as they should) but with any luck it won't be enough of an error to trigger a response. It should be possible to turn traction control and ABS off, anyway... although that usually requires pushing a switch each time the car is started (since these features default to "on" each time).

 

[brian_]

I don't have the choice to disable or bypass the ABS/traction control system.
Considering it will not have the proper information from the wheel speed sensors, the system will probably send me in the ditch in an event of wheels spin on ice/snow or in the case of wheel lock after applying brake.

Anyone have idea?
Removing the ABS fuse simply don't allowing the car to shift in drive mode.

I don't think it will be a problem. The "front" and "rear" speeds should never disagree with conditions enough to cause a problematic response. Specifically for wheelspin, there won't be any front-to-rear difference detected, and if wheelspin is detected (as Duncan suggested) by rate of change, all that will trigger is power reduction or braking of the spinning wheel... but power reduction is what you would want anyway, and the Leaf bits won't have control of the van's braking.