Yeah this is a good way to go, and would be cool to try... just cost
prohibitive. We can't even afford health insurance let alone a hybrid syncro
ha

Jim Akiba

On 10/4/07, David Marshall <mailinglist@fastforward.ca> wrote:
>
> To make a hybrid would be rather simple (to a point!) thing to do in a
> Vanagon.  Personally I would leave the rear engine alone and not
> install anything back there.  What you need to do is get the front
> end from a Syncro and get the electric motor to run on the front
> wheels.  You have the whole underside of the van for the engine and
> battery storage...
>
> David Marshall
>
> http://www.hasenwerk.ca
> http://www.fastforward.ca
>
> Box
> 4153, Quesnel BC, Canada V2J 3J2
>
> On Thu, October 4, 2007 10:26,
> Mark Keller wrote:
> > Jim,
> >
> > I do think that the
> smallish engine/ engine compartment sizing that the
> > vanagon has
> means it is ideally  configured to benefit from a hybrid
> >
> approach.  In that a hybrid is implemented by using a smaller sized ICE
> > to start with means  that Vanagons were somewhat  pre-hybrid
> > manufactured.  Cost of impleenting the new technology isn't
> necessarily
> > a decision point.  It seems worth cruching the
> numbers from the
> > suppliers listed. The Kta site reference say
> $3150.  This not a hybid,
> > but does give a rough approximate of
> the cost of similiary sized
> > componets.  Ie a smaller motor,
> >
> >  KTA EV Conversion Kit #1...suitable for propelling 500
> to 1500 lb.
> > motorcycle or ultralight kit car...at speeds up to
> 55 MPH...48 to 72
> > V...basic kit without extras includes: ADV. DC
> #K91-4003...CURTIS
> > #1209B-6402...CURTIS #PB-6...ALBRIGHT
> #SW-180B ...FERRAZ/SHAWMUT
> > #A15QS400-4...G.E. #TQD-150...KTA
> SWITCHPLATE...WESTBERG #A2C6-30 &
> > A2C5-3 (48 V) or A2C5-28
> (54-72 V)...DELTEC #MKB-500-50 & MKA-50-50...K
> > & W
> #BC-20...MAGNECRAFT #W389ACX-9...PRESTOFLEX #4 GA Cable...MAGNA
> >
> Lugs, Heat Shrink Pieces...10-pos. Barrier Strip...Welding Cable Tool
> Kit
> >
> >  $2750 to $3150
> >
> > approx.
> >
> > Ultimately a waterboxer could be hybrid electric with
> direct injected
> > propane and a  screw supercharger  --that would
> be: interesting,
> > powerful, economical and clean!
> >
> > In that flywheel conservation of momentum isn't being practiced by
> DIY,
> > it may not be ultimately practical in expense or man hours
> to complete.
> > This following site is somewhat applicable. I
> couldn't find a enthusiast
> > kit or working model, as in the
> ICE-Electric hybrid approach.
> >
> >
> http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978PhDT.........6U
> >
> > Off
> topic, As to marine use efficiency the site is a for pure
> >
> ICE-Electric setup.  All modern cruise ships use this format, like
> > trains do.  They utilized an  A/C motor pod beneath the vessel
> for
> > propulsion and the ICE diesel in the hull. The reason is ,
> from the OSSA
> > site explanation on fuel efficiency, I realize
> this is marketing
> > oriented but then again, we have to "read
> around" marketing hype all the
> > time. OSSA or Glacier Bay
> seems to be the real deal though, if you look
> > through their
> site.
> >
> >     " This means that diesel-electric
> systems can be much better at
> > "self-optimizing" to
> accommodate varying loads than are conventional
> > systems. At sea,
> load conditions change by the trip (number of
> > passengers), by
> the hour (wind and tide) and by the minute (going up a
> > wave or
> surfing down it). These variations provide a significant
> >
> opportunity for fuel savings."
> >
> > /Seems to me
> hybrid would not be a good fit for a marine application,
> >
> varying
> > rpm, load, and regen braking are where the hybrid is
> compelling as you
> > pointed out. I believe that in our
> vans(typically lot's of hwy miles) the
> > total thermal efficiency
> is going to be low enough that other technologies
> > will make more
> sense before current hybrid technology for efficiency. For
> > me,
> because I use my 9 pass. as a daily driver, and it's mostly city
> >
> miles,
> > it might be great from an efficiency standpoint.
> From a cost standpoint
> > it's
> > still really high.
> There is another even simpler way to have some of the
> > exact same
> benefits would mentioned. Good old flywheels. Imagine a monster
> >
> flywheel with axis of rotation up/down under the van dead center. It
> would
> > be cool because not only could you use it to store, and
> retrieve energy
> > like
> > a hybrid system, but it would
> gyroscopically stabilize the van in the
> > correct plane and in
> theory would be more efficient itself at storing
> > mechanical
> energy because there is no transformation required.  Make it as
> >
> heavy as one of the hybrid battery packs as large in diameter as
> possible
> > with the weight biased to the outside edge, and spin it
> as fast as
> > realistically possible and I wonder what kind of
> thermal efficiency you
> > could reach in city driving./
> >
>
> > Jim Akiba
> >
> > On 10/4/07, Mark Keller
> <kelphoto@telus.net> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> Hi gang,
> >>>
> >>> With the
> question of making a hybrid a I'm a bit of a neophyte, but In
> >>> researching a hybrid install for a marine customer I  came
> across a
> >>> couple of websites that explain to some of us
> why putting an electric
> >>> motor on a ICE, internal
> combustion engine, can actually improve the
> >>> ICE
> >>> fuel mileage, and in course have beneficial effects on
> emissions. I've
> >>> summarized it below and included the
> websites at the bottom
> >>>
> >>> The Basic
> benefiting principle is that ICE are not equally efficient
> >>> at
> >>> converting fuel to usable work at all
> RPM ranges.  Most efficient is at
> >>> combination of
> gearing, 75% throttle and RPM. Least efficient at idle
> >>>
> and anything less than 75% throttle. Hybrid  Engine controllers
> >>> supplement the ICE with the electrical motor at the less
> efficient ICE
> >>> RPMs, and recover some of the electrical
> energy in braking and when at
> >>> efficient ICE RPMs.
> >>>
> >>> The other benefits: ( Inductively
> thinking is all I have to go on so be
> >>> forewarned).
> Engine life would be enhanced, since it's overall load is
> >>> reduced by transferring electrical power in demand
> situations where the
> >>> ICE is not at it's most thermally
> efficient RPM range. This "power" is
> >>> partly
> free, in that the EC, engine controller, recovers electrical
> >>> energy by charging the batteries, which is a "braking
> effect" on the
> >>> vehicle.  Brakes on the vehicle last
> longer, since they see less
> >>> stopping momentum. You get
> the idea.
> >>>
> >>> The rest of the electrical
> power comes from two sources.  When the
> >>> engine is at
> cruise RPM, aka a efficient thermal RPM and the load on
> >>>
> the
> >>> engine permits, charging of the batteries takes
> place.  The EC takes
> >>> care of this
> "seamlessly".  The other charge is the nightly plug in.
> >>>
> >>> In my opinion, while none of the above
> operations occur at ideal rpms
> >>> to
> >>> the
> power/generation electric motor, or the ICE, a recognizable benefit
> >>> does occur. I say this because in a true application, the
> ICE would
> >>> only
> >>> operate at it's optimum
> thermal efficient RPM in order to supply the
> >>> electric
> motor.  This is not completely a windfall though as pound for
> >>> pound, the electric motor needed to replace the ICE's
> torque is heavy,
> >>> some 600lbs.  Nor is a 50kw electric
> motor Cheap!
> >>>
> >>> Another good thing is
> that the waterboxer is light at 265lbs and the
> >>> engine's
> combustion chamber designe is particular efficient at cruise
> >>> rpm. Even more so with an updated EC. So in my opinion a
> pretty
> >>> competitive application of technology to the
> waterboxer.
> >>>
> >>> In another twist I think
> that the elusive "more torque" question is
> >>>
> solved by the electric motor being there to help get extra boost to
> >>> move
> >>> the vehicle when needed.  This is
> subtle but the key is that the torque
> >>> boost helps by
> getting the waterboxer RPMs up to it's power range.
> >>>
> This
> >>> is important because the engine is so weak at lower
> RPMs, I believe we
> >>> would see a greater benefit than
> other vehilce/engine combinations.
> >>>
> >>>
> Thanks for listening in
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>> In order of relevance
> >>> Diesel-electric
> marine propulsion systems and accessories.
> >>> <
> >>>
>
> http://www.ossapowerlite.com/tech_library/fuel_efficiency/fuel_efficiency.htm
> >>
> >>
> >>>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> KTA Services Inc. <
> http://www.kta-ev.com/>
> >>> L.M.C. Manufacturers of
> Permanent Magnet DC Motors
> >>>
> <http://www.lemcoltd.com/performance.htm>
> >>> Curtis
> Instruments- Instrumentation, motor speed controllers, battery
> >>> chargers <http://www.curtisinst.com/>
> >>>
> >>> DetectorTechnologies.com - Product
> Catalog
> >>> <
> >>>
> http://www.detectortechnologies.com/store/SearchResult.aspx?CategoryID=5
> >>
> >>
> >>>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ASMO Marine
> <http://www.asmomarine.com/2005/asmo_uk/00.shtml>
> >>>
> taylorproductolinecard-bilingual.pdf (application/pdf Object)
> >>>
> <http://www.taylorproducto.ca/taylorproductolinecard-bilingual.pdf>
> >>> http://www.steamboating.net/
> >>>
> >>> Boat Design Net - the Boat Design and Boat Building Site
> >>> <http://boatdesign.net/>
> >>> has a
> Hybrid forum under the propulsion section.
> >>> Boat Design
> Net - the Boat Design and Boat Building Site
> >>>
> <http://boatdesign.net/>
> >>
> >
>