c/Cars is the largest automotive enthusiast community on Lemmy and the fediverse. We're your central hub for vehicle-related discussion, industry news, reviews, projects, DIY guides, advice, stories, and more.
You'd need to replace the entire engine to do anything useful.
Not sure what you'd get out of replacing either of those with an "EV motor". For all intents, the starter is an "EV motor" with a "starter drive" so it's not always engaged. It's a 12v, high current DC motor.
If you tried to put a load on the flywheel/flexplate, you'd just shred the teeth - they weren't designed for continuous use.
This idea makes no sense at all.
Gm used to, Volvo and Ram currently offer them.
You would get rid of the starter since the electric motor can start the engine.
What are you talking about?
I suspect we're talking past each other.
If you're talking about the Chrysler/Jeep electric motor boost thing, that's not new - Eaton has made them for going on 30 years for semis.
But retrofitting... Look at the torque loads you're talking about. And the space required.
For example, starters use a lot of current and generate significant torque, for seconds at a time. They overheat quickly. Trying to retrofit a more capable electric motor would be a huge task. Hell, simply removing the starter on some V8s requires detaching a motor mount and lifting the engine, there's so little space.
It would be even worse for the alternator (which would really revert to using a generator). You'd have to reengineer the crank pulley setup (basically give the crank a mount plate like the rear does), as the key design is intended as a shear relief. And that means all new pulleys, etc. Take a look at what's required to install a an aftermarket supercharger on a V8, say for racing. And the street versions don't require the torque loads you're looking at with a useful generator.
To do this aftermarket, it would require being engineered on a per-engine-platform basis, at a minimum, and then also per vehicle, as space constraints and mounts vary so much.
Then looking at that cost, and materials, battery, cables, etc, there are better ways to spend money and resources to achieve, what exactly?
The belt for the etorque is pretty tame compared to some supercharger setups I’ve seen. Its packaging is about as much as an old a/c compressor.
Crank pulley setups are easy and common to replace or retrofit.
I’m familiar with what you’re talking about and don’t see the issue.
Have you ever retrofit anything to an engine?
I'm going to say no, though I don't actually know for sure.
I imagine any accessory belt driven alternator/generator/motor setup would have practically meaningless value towards torque or economy; limited by the friction available from the belt.
Edity edit: just saw your vid. Well call me Sally, there is something like that. Yeah, that belt had to be massively upscaled!
I think all Volvos and Rams have them currently? And GM used to use them.
For drive power?
An alternator can charge a battery and run accessories, but given 1 horsepower is roughly 730 watts, you really need some high voltage system to keep the magic smoke in.
Edit: maybe we're talking different things. Honda used to integrate electric motors directly to engines in their early hybrids. Ford, iiiiif I recall, combine engine and electric power in the CVT transmission.
Both can use the EV motor as a massive alternator, but a standard alternator is simply too small, and attached to the engine too weakly, to generate the power of a hybrid.
https://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/l8b/
Volvo and Ram are using this system currently. Probably 48v.
The echarger I found runs 100+hp but doesn’t seem to be in production yet.
And that's a system that was engineered end-to-end.
Developing an add-on is far more difficult.
Look at the aftermarket supercharger options for most any vehicle. Far simpler than this, and yet there are very, very few, with very limited engine platforms supported.
There are tons of superchargers for nearly every engine platform, but especially the common ones.