In standard form, aren't Type 2 VW Kombis a bit lighter than a DS Citroen? Are you saying an EV converted DS will be lighter than an EV converted Kombi?
EV DS
- Thread starter MikeHolt
- Start date
In standard form, aren't Type 2 VW Kombis a bit lighter than a DS Citroen? Are you saying an EV converted DS will be lighter than an EV converted Kombi?
Interesting to note this DS conversion retains the gearbox ( possibly for the brakes ) ... with the full torgue available from start wouldn't the gears be unnecessary ?
Conversion of conventionally braked vehicles is possibly easier, because the brakes are at the wheels, though 2CV and GS designs have inboard brakes as well.
The DS platform with "boxes" occupied by fuel tank, transverse muffler and a 2 level boot floor would probably be a good start, yet in this case the engine bay is battery storage. Tesla's battery storage is under floor integrated .. sort of like a DS's built in "boxes".
I have read of exorbitant repair costs because of that floor/battery storage design.
Conversion of conventionally braked vehicles is possibly easier, because the brakes are at the wheels, though 2CV and GS designs have inboard brakes as well.
The DS platform with "boxes" occupied by fuel tank, transverse muffler and a 2 level boot floor would probably be a good start, yet in this case the engine bay is battery storage. Tesla's battery storage is under floor integrated .. sort of like a DS's built in "boxes".
I have read of exorbitant repair costs because of that floor/battery storage design.
Having built an electric Polo conversion, I have some experience in this.
The low voltage (120-144v) brushed motors were used in the past but newer high voltage brushless motors are far superior.
Lower voltage means higher current. My little car used a Netgain Warp motor & could easily draw 600+ amps on hard acceleration.
The brushed setup meant that regen braking could not be used. The brushes are advanced for optimum forward performance & regen causes huge amounts of arcing. Setting the brushes in the neutral position gave mediocre performance for the same current draw.
My LiFePo 144V 130A battery pack of 45 cells weighed about 180kg including the mounting frames with a volume of around 120 litres
It was 18.7kW & only just fitted in the car.
Using 200Ah LiFePo batteries would give 28.8kW, would weigh about 270kg & would have a volume of about 185 litres.
Using 400Ah LiFePo batteries would give 57.6kW, would weigh about 670kg & would have a volume of about 430 litres.
Generally speaking you couldn't put a motor in that had 30% more power that the largest offered by the original manufacturers.
To get a bigger battery pack in you have to start losing passenger seat spaces so you don't exceed the GVM.
My Polo was engineered for 4 passengers but my friends Charade, also electric, was engineered for only 2 passengers.
An electric conversion WILL always be heavier that the original car. Tare will be more & creeps closer the GVM.
Engineering an electric conversion these days in NSW is crazy expensive let alone the actual building bit of it.
The low voltage (120-144v) brushed motors were used in the past but newer high voltage brushless motors are far superior.
Lower voltage means higher current. My little car used a Netgain Warp motor & could easily draw 600+ amps on hard acceleration.
The brushed setup meant that regen braking could not be used. The brushes are advanced for optimum forward performance & regen causes huge amounts of arcing. Setting the brushes in the neutral position gave mediocre performance for the same current draw.
My LiFePo 144V 130A battery pack of 45 cells weighed about 180kg including the mounting frames with a volume of around 120 litres
It was 18.7kW & only just fitted in the car.
Using 200Ah LiFePo batteries would give 28.8kW, would weigh about 270kg & would have a volume of about 185 litres.
Using 400Ah LiFePo batteries would give 57.6kW, would weigh about 670kg & would have a volume of about 430 litres.
Generally speaking you couldn't put a motor in that had 30% more power that the largest offered by the original manufacturers.
To get a bigger battery pack in you have to start losing passenger seat spaces so you don't exceed the GVM.
My Polo was engineered for 4 passengers but my friends Charade, also electric, was engineered for only 2 passengers.
An electric conversion WILL always be heavier that the original car. Tare will be more & creeps closer the GVM.
Engineering an electric conversion these days in NSW is crazy expensive let alone the actual building bit of it.
Last edited:
Having built an electric Polo conversion, I have some experience in this.
The low voltage (120-144v) brushed motors were used in the past but newer high voltage brushless motors are far superior.
Lower voltage means higher current. My little car used a Netgain Warp motor & could easily draw 600+ amps on hard acceleration.
The brushed setup meant that regen braking could not be used. The brushes are advanced for optimum forward performance & regen causes huge amounts of arcing. Setting the brushes in the neutral position gave mediocre performance for the same current draw.
In the earlier conversions the gearbox was retained for a couple of reasons.
The DC brushed motors have a rev limit of around 5500rpm. Faster than this for an extended period can lead to the commutator flying apart.
Direct to differential current draw from standstill can be very, very high & the motor is not turning fast enough for the fan to cool it.
This would be the same as trying to take off in 4th gear.
I generally only used 2nd & 3rd gear.
By comparison, a Tesla motor has a fixed reduction gearbox but can easily spin up to 18000 rpm.
They also run at 320V so the is a substantial reduction in the current draw
My LiFePo 144V 130A battery pack of 45 cells weighed about 180kg including the mounting frames with a volume of around 120 litres
It was 18.7kW & only just fitted in the car.
Using 200Ah LiFePo batteries would give 28.8kW, would weigh about 270kg & would have a volume of about 185 litres.
Using 400Ah LiFePo batteries would give 57.6kW, would weigh about 670kg & would have a volume of about 430 litres.
Generally speaking you couldn't put a motor in that had 30% more power that the largest offered by the original manufacturers.
To get a bigger battery pack in you have to start losing passenger seat spaces so you don't exceed the GVM.
My Polo was engineered for 4 passengers but my friends Charade, also electric, was engineered for only 2 passengers.
An electric conversion WILL always be heavier that the original car. Tare will be more & creeps closer the GVM.
Engineering an electric conversion these days in NSW is crazy expensive let alone the actual building bit of it.
The low voltage (120-144v) brushed motors were used in the past but newer high voltage brushless motors are far superior.
Lower voltage means higher current. My little car used a Netgain Warp motor & could easily draw 600+ amps on hard acceleration.
The brushed setup meant that regen braking could not be used. The brushes are advanced for optimum forward performance & regen causes huge amounts of arcing. Setting the brushes in the neutral position gave mediocre performance for the same current draw.
In the earlier conversions the gearbox was retained for a couple of reasons.
The DC brushed motors have a rev limit of around 5500rpm. Faster than this for an extended period can lead to the commutator flying apart.
Direct to differential current draw from standstill can be very, very high & the motor is not turning fast enough for the fan to cool it.
This would be the same as trying to take off in 4th gear.
I generally only used 2nd & 3rd gear.
By comparison, a Tesla motor has a fixed reduction gearbox but can easily spin up to 18000 rpm.
They also run at 320V so the is a substantial reduction in the current draw
My LiFePo 144V 130A battery pack of 45 cells weighed about 180kg including the mounting frames with a volume of around 120 litres
It was 18.7kW & only just fitted in the car.
Using 200Ah LiFePo batteries would give 28.8kW, would weigh about 270kg & would have a volume of about 185 litres.
Using 400Ah LiFePo batteries would give 57.6kW, would weigh about 670kg & would have a volume of about 430 litres.
Generally speaking you couldn't put a motor in that had 30% more power that the largest offered by the original manufacturers.
To get a bigger battery pack in you have to start losing passenger seat spaces so you don't exceed the GVM.
My Polo was engineered for 4 passengers but my friends Charade, also electric, was engineered for only 2 passengers.
An electric conversion WILL always be heavier that the original car. Tare will be more & creeps closer the GVM.
Engineering an electric conversion these days in NSW is crazy expensive let alone the actual building bit of it.
Here is a video made 4 years ago of the DS converted in Sydney by Aldo.
I have ridden in this car and must say it was a delight, noisiest part was the hydraulic pump driven by a small auxiliary motor, 12 volt I believe. Removal of motor, exhaust and fuel tank allowed a reasonable battery capacity while keeping the weight under control, though the gearbox was retained, mostly to preserve the original braking system.
Sadly, the video is excruciating to listen to! Absolutely inane commentary (to my way of thinking
)
I have ridden in this car and must say it was a delight, noisiest part was the hydraulic pump driven by a small auxiliary motor, 12 volt I believe. Removal of motor, exhaust and fuel tank allowed a reasonable battery capacity while keeping the weight under control, though the gearbox was retained, mostly to preserve the original braking system.
Sadly, the video is excruciating to listen to! Absolutely inane commentary (to my way of thinking
) 
The type 2 Kombi I converted weighed in at over 1650kg pre-conversion and ended up 200kg heavier at about 1850kg. The VW engine is lighter than the DS block I believe (150kg vs about 250kg). And the DS depending which model is less than 1300kg. While the Hyper 9 would provide similar power albeit more torque and peak at zero rpm, the weight of the motor is about a quarter that of the DS engine especially considering the weight of associated parts such as starter motor, alternator, radiator, exhaust, etc.
That's a heavy Kombi, was it a camper van?
DS23 kerb weight 1340lg, load max 500kg.
Luckily we’ve moved on from the days of DC motor conversions. The warp motors were very good and did the job however cannot compare with the SRIPM motors like the Hyper 9. Tesla uses the same motor type in the model 3 and model Y. The losses are so minimal at 94% plus efficiency there’s no need for a cooling fan and the aluminium housing is sealed enough that it can be cleaned with a high pressure hose (IP65 rating). And the controller is the most compact I’ve seen, incidentally it does have to be cooled. I use a chill plate and tube radiator, no fan needed, just a small reservoir and pump.
The best batteries for energy density and weight are currently Tesla modules using 18650 cells in a 74p6s configuration. The Kombi has 10 modules in parallel which gives 53kWh of capacity at a weight of 250kg. Balanced equally front and rear there’s an extra 100kg on each axle.
In a DS it would also be very possible to parallel 10 modules with 4-5 stacked above the motor, 2-4 in the fuel tank cavity (however I haven’t measured this space), and 2-4 in the lower part of the boot. This would give a very good range in a DS I think, as it would be fairly efficient at highway speeds, however nowhere near the potential of a Tesla model 3 which has a cd rating of less than 0.23. DS is more like 0.36. Still better than the Kombi at 0.57.
A conversion won’t always be heavier. I’m just finishing a Porsche 356a which I’m aiming to keep at the same weight except it will be more balanced with an extra weight at the front. If you’ve ever driven a 1950’s Porsche or VW you’ll understand how important it is to keep weight in the front. Even the fuel getting low (tank is under the bonnet) can affect the handling.
Curiously two Tesla modules fit in the same space as the fuel tank. With twin chargers in front providing up to 7kW of charge and 2000W of 12V power. All that with regen on the brake pedal and 3 modes of off-throttle regen adjustable by a dash mounted switch.
It is a camper however I am wrong about the weights by 200kg. Looking back at the weighbridge certificates it’s 1660kg up from about 1440kg originally. 120kg additional weight up front and 100kg additional at rear. I had a specialist fit an adjustable heavy duty torsion bar set to raise the height a little. Another advantage of self-levelling hydropneumatic suspension in the DS. And they do ride better with a bit of extra weight in the back don’t they. I need to fit an anti-roll bar to the rear of the Kombi as it’s quite unsettling with crosswinds on the highway, another thing a DS has no problem with.
These are VW Type 2 weights up to '68.
The heaviest is the '68 9 seat bus at 2723 lbs or 1238 kg. These are ready to drive weights.
The '68s to '74s were all pretty much the same.
The last run of Kombis were the heaviest but even the heaviest of them all (the Westfalia campmobile) only weighed in at a 1495 kg kerb weight. This image is from a '78 owner's manual.
A complete carby VW engine is 119 kg.
I couldn't find an engine weight for a DS engine but I did find one on the Douvrin engine and the article stated that at 260 lbs it was 40% lighter than the DS engine. That would put the DS engine at 364 lbs or 166 kg. In addition to that you would have the weight of 11 litres of coolant and the radiator and hoses. 185 kg all up would be a fair call.
I think with the engines removed an "average" DS and an "average" later model Kombi bus will weigh about the same.
If you are talking an early Kombi the Kombi could be quite a bit lighter than a DS.
I would think if the wheel tyre choice on the DS were sensible, the difference in rotating mass and rolling resistance compared to the Tesla's wheel/tyre combo would most likely offset the difference in the cd?
I recall reading somewhere that a Model X with 22" wheels used 20% more energy than the same vehicle did with 20" wheels.
I would think a lightweight set of alloy wheels in the standard DS dimensions with a wise choice of lightweight tyre would reap some range benefits.
Finding a modern low drag tyre in something close to the DS's size could be interesting though,
once you go past a 185, particularly on the back, things get tight.I’d love to know the weight of the DS 2300 engine. The 240kg estimation does seem heavy for a 4 cylinder block but it would be heavier than the VW engine wouldn’t it? If you take the heaviest DS the DS23 and the lightest split screen VW then the DS comes out as heavier. However the early DS19 has been listed as low as 1125kg and the later T2 Kombi over 1450kg. It shows just how much variation in weight during such long model runs. I weighed the Kombi engine before sending it off and with exhaust and flywheel attached (no clutch), it was just over 150kg.
Hi.
I used to get this wrong until I understood what is occurring.
If 260lb is 40% lighter than the original, then what remains must be 60% of the original weight.
260lb / 60 = 4.33 x 100 = 433lb
or alternatively: 260lb x (100/60) 1.66 = 433lb
433lb / 2.2 = 197kg.
The proof: 433lb less 40% (173lb) = 260lb
Cheers.
Yeah you've got a bit of crap hanging off there, the 119 kg I quoted is for a complete early model single carb engine. Your exhaust looks pretty heavy compared to a standard one, remember you are also weighing your lifting chain and brackets and I'm guessing the sump still had oil in it as well?
Who knows for a DS? A fully dressed 1800cc MGB engine weighs 181 kg. That includes clutch, flywheel, alternator, etc. These engines also have twin carbies, a cast iron head, a cast iron water pump, a cast iron exhaust manifold and a very deep block skirt that extends down past the centerline of the crank. The short stroke DS block's skirt is in line with the crank centerline, it has an alloy head and alloy waterpump. Cast iron is bloody heavy I would have my doubts that the part alloy DS engine would be significantly heavier than the all cast iron MGB one.
I just re-read Autocar article that cited the all alloy Douvrin engine weighed 260 lbs, it also says it was 110 lbs lighter than the outgoing DS engine. they then said "4% lighter", (not 40%) which was a little confusing as it wasn't explained very well, but I worked out they meant the "entire car" was 4% lighter due to the 50 kg of engine weight savings.
So that would mean 370 lbs or 168 kg for the DS engine.
So that would mean 370 lbs or 168 kg for the DS engine.
I just re-read Autocar article that cited the all alloy Douvrin engine weighed 260 lbs, it also says it was 110 lbs lighter than the outgoing DS engine. they then said "4% lighter", (not 40%) which was a little confusing as it wasn't explained very well, but I worked out they meant the "entire car" was 4% lighter due to the 50 kg of engine weight savings.
So that would mean 370 lbs or 168 kg for the DS engine.
They are callled "CX athenas" ... if you look up the weight of a CX athena versus a cx with the cast iron lump ... you shoudl be able to find the weight difference.