Sponsored

ODDs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
630
Reaction score
1,176
Location
Phoenix
Vehicle(s)
2019 Hella Yella Sahara
Exactly, the BMW i3 with the range extender seemed like a good solution, not sure whey we didn't pursue that further. A small gas tank and a really small ICE motor that spun at 1 efficient speed and it's sole job was to provide some extra juice to the battery. I think this would be a great way to help people with range anxiety, especially Jeep off road.
And that range extender should be a gas-turbine engine! Maybe a spare tire replacement kit?

https://www.carscoops.com/2022/09/ariel-hipercar-is-an-1180-hp-ev-with-a-gas-turbine-range-extender/
Jeep Wrangler JL ⚡️ 2024 Jeep Recon EV Revealed! (Off-Road Capable BEV) *** ⚠️ WARNING: NO POLITICS *** 1662738465075
Sponsored

 

sconrad24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2021
Threads
10
Messages
349
Reaction score
325
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
2016 Willys JKU, 2021 4XE
Yes, end-of-life is a huge issue in terms of environmental impact.

There is a business opportunity somewhere in there. Most EV battery companies seem to be focused on energy efficiency, then longevity, with recycling being a distant third.

I think a battery company with the strategy of being a fast follower rather than first innovator on the energy density front but developing a very efficient end-of-life & materials recovery process could offer batteries to OEMs that translate to lower MSRP for the customer, thus easing the financial barrier to entry for middle-class buyers, while building a steady recurring revenue stream for mid-vehicle-life replacement batteries sold directly to consumer every 5 years.
I read the other day, not sure, where that a company came up with a algorithm to read the battery's current state and then tell the charger how to send the power. The end result was the ability to charge to 90% in 10 minutes with little to no degradation. If thats possible we could be getting crazy mileage life out of evs.
 

Cutterone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Threads
13
Messages
645
Reaction score
812
Location
NH
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLU Sahara Sarge 6sp
Yes, end-of-life is a huge issue in terms of environmental impact.

There is a business opportunity somewhere in there. Most EV battery companies seem to be focused on energy efficiency, then longevity, with recycling being a distant third.

I think a battery company with the strategy of being a fast follower rather than first innovator on the energy density front but developing a very efficient end-of-life & materials recovery process could offer batteries to OEMs that translate to lower MSRP for the customer, thus easing the financial barrier to entry for middle-class buyers, while building a steady recurring revenue stream for mid-vehicle-life replacement batteries sold directly to consumer every 5 years.
Agreed, I'd like to know what percentage of rare earth minerals, lithium being the big one, can be extracted from spent battery cells, and at what cost both financially and environmentally... I'm not apposed to alternate forms of transport, just the current trends are pushing us into a technology that from my point of view just isn't at the point it can be viable for most people, or better for the earth...and are those elements in a reusable state once extracted?
 

Asuriyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
209
Reaction score
532
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Vehicle(s)
2023 Sarge Green JLR (6MT)
I'm def in the solid axle camp for the Wrangler as is. But I think the whole solid vs. independent thing goes out the window when you have the drivetrain essentially directly in each hub. For example there would be no CV joints. I'm by no means an expert, but I get the sense there is very much the potential for a "have our cake and eat it too" situation. At least I hope so!
A solid axle still has significant advantages in electrification, especially in heavy-duty applications. You can retain the one-piece construction of a standard axle, which is more durable and simpler than sets of control arms could ever be. It's a little different than what Jeep did with the Magneto - that has a single electric motor bank with a standard manual transmission drivetrain. With Dana/Spicer branching into e-axles for their commercial products, I would expect a production Wrangler EV to have the motors in the axles. The motor banks fit where the differential pumpkin would be, you still have individual power to each wheel, and you retain the tubes and shafts of a standard solid axle, in a package that's about the size and weight of a standard Dana 60.

There's the issue of articulation, too. For an independent-suspension setup to get anywhere near the wheel travel of a solid axle, you have to get creative, like the TAK-4i gas-articulated auto-leveling system on the JLTV (look it up, it's fucking cool). The long control arms aren't as much of an issue if the motors are at the hubs - no CV joints or long shafts - but hub-mounted motors isn't ideal for an offroad vehicle where a lot of the load will be at low speed and you don't have the passive cooling of airflow. Motors in the center of each axle would be much easier to keep cool, without running hoses down control arms.

Also, you could easily retain the mechanical linkages of a standard part-time 4WD setup - even with individual power to the wheels, there's an huge crawling advantage to being able to lock any combination of wheels together.
 
Last edited:

sconrad24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2021
Threads
10
Messages
349
Reaction score
325
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
2016 Willys JKU, 2021 4XE
I'm helping getting this thread off track. So summing up my thoughts, my 4xe has me wanting to go full ev for my next vehicle, the recon is intriguing and im happy to add it to my short list of the Ionic 5 and EV 6. The Hummers and Rivians are out of my price point. Jeep if you are reading this make this recon with a 250-300 mile range and a sub 5 0-60 in the same price range as the Kia and Hyundai, you may have me hooked. Although the new ev charger and 2 door jl or jk might be the best of both worlds.
 

Sponsored

Bzinsky

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
710
Reaction score
823
Location
Usa
Vehicle(s)
2022 rubicon 4xe
A solid axle still has significant advantages in electrification, especially in heavy-duty applications. You can retain the one-piece construction of a standard axle, which is more durable and simpler than sets of control arms could ever be. It's a little different than what Jeep did with the Magneto - that has a single electric motor bank with a standard manual transmission drivetrain. With Dana/Spicer branching into e-axles for their commercial products, I would expect a production Wrangler EV to have the motors in the axles. The motor banks fit where the differential pumpkin would be, you still have individual power to each wheel, and you retain the tubes and shafts of a standard solid axle, in a package that's about the size and weight of a standard Dana 60.

There's the issue of articulation, too. For an independent-suspension setup to get anywhere near the wheel travel of a solid axle, you have to get creative, like the TAK-4i gas-articulated auto-leveling system on the JLTV (look it up, it's fucking cool). The long control arms aren't as much of an issue if the motors are at the hubs - no CV joints or long shafts - but hub-mounted motors isn't ideal for an offroad vehicle where a lot of the load will be at low speed and you don't have the passive cooling of airflow. Motors in the center of each axle would be much easier to keep cool, without running hoses down the control arms.

Also, you could easily retain the mechanical linkages of a standard part-time 4WD setup - even with individual power to the wheels, there's an huge crawling advantage to being able to lock any combination of wheels together.
Hmmm electric motors in or around the pumpkin.
I previously posted that there will never be an electric wrangler.
I thought about why your idea wouldn’t be feasible for like 5 minutes, I got nothing.

Maybe there is hope

certainly a lot of unsprung mass, but not the end of the world.

As a matter of fact, I don’t see why you couldn’t literally just slice off a 4” section each side of a dana axle and install a motor on each side (like the axle becomes a motor shaft). Remove the driveshaft entirely, bam done.

Highly efficient and lockable.

(I’d ditch the shafts running front to rear in favor of two separate axles.)
 

oceanbretzke

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jason
Joined
Mar 17, 2022
Threads
3
Messages
94
Reaction score
93
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2022 Jeep JLU Rubicon Extreme Recon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Ocean Engineer / US Navy Diver
I'm aware the world has a finite amount of extractable fossil fuels, but do people think the earth has enough rare earth minerals, lithium mainly, to build millions of these huge batteries far into the future? It's just not sustainable without a new form of battery tech and power generation. We've had the solution to clean power for 70 years, the new gen 4 or 5 reactors are small, efficient, and with safeguard on top of safeguard, as safe as anything, but here we are phasing them out and being pushed to a tech which is neither more environmentally safe or sustainable as our current fossil fuels! I surely don't have all the answers but that isn't it...
I agree completely. Not to get political but I do think the percentage of people driving electric will continue to grow especially in cities. But trying to push a square peg in a round hole doesn’t work. Technology wise we just arent there yet. Plus the costs is way to high still (young couple working three jobs to get by isn’t thinking about driving a Tesla). And in reality climate change and the world is coming to an end is such BS. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldn’t do better or advance technology. I am all for it. But constant push that it needs to happen now is foolish. One of main reason we have higher taxes and inflation right now. Again not saying we shouldn’t keep pushing forward we just need new a effective approach. We will still be driving petroleum based vehicles in 50 years. The only way that changes is if we make some sort of huge leap in technology or a new energy source.

The energy source is huge. I truly believe we are due huge advance here. Think fusion or something along those lines.
 
Last edited:

Asuriyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
209
Reaction score
532
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Vehicle(s)
2023 Sarge Green JLR (6MT)
Hmmm electric motors in or around the pumpkin.
I previously posted that there will never be an electric wrangler.
I thought about why your idea wouldn’t be feasible for like 5 minutes, I got nothing.

Maybe there is hope

certainly a lot of unsprung mass, but not the end of the world.

As a matter of fact, I don’t see why you couldn’t literally just slice off a 4” section each side of a dana axle and install a motor on each side (like the axle becomes a motor shaft). Remove the driveshaft entirely, bam done.

Highly efficient and lockable.

(I’d ditch the shafts running front to rear in favor of two separate axles.)
Hub-mounted motors work better with solid axles, too, because of that cooling factor. Instead of vulnerable external tubes, you could run coolant pipes where the axle shaft would be. The advantage of having them centralized is mainly that you have the motors, cooling and actuators contained within a single reinforced package. Also, the axle is heavier than a D30 or 44, but the unsprung weight difference is negligible since the extra mass is also centralized.

Also - don't throw out the driveshaft entirely - the transmission, transfer case and driveshafts could be replaced with a bi-directional dual transfer case for crawling that acts as a cross-torque multiplier. Rear left and front right motors/wheels driven together, and vice-versa, at a 1:1 or 4:1 ratio - only two center differentials needed, one on each side. Quad-driveshafts. Mechanically simpler than routing power out of and back into the same axle through a transfer case, and keeps the axle smaller than it would be if you tried to do multi-ratio gearing in the motor bank. Rotation along the vehicle's axis is all counterbalanced, so minimal NVH. The whole thing would be disengaged during normal driving (4HI or 4LO only). The extra mechanical complexity is justified by the stupendous crawling advantage - and the parts and linkages required are well within Spicer's capability to build.
 
Last edited:

Mocopo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kevin
Joined
Jun 13, 2022
Threads
5
Messages
736
Reaction score
1,484
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
22 JLURXR
Build Thread
Link
I agree completely. Not to get political but I do think the percentage of people driving electric will continue to grow especially in cities. But trying to push a square peg in a round hole doesn’t work. Technology wise we just arent there yet. Plus the costs is way to high still (young couple working three jobs to get by isn’t thinking about driving a Tesla). And in reality climate change and the world is coming to an end is such BS. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldn’t do better or advance technology. I am all for it. But constant push that it needs to happen now is foolish. One of main reason we have higher taxes and inflation right now. Again not saying we shouldn’t keep pushing forward we just need new a effective approach. We will still be driving petroleum based vehicles in 50 years. The only way that changes is if we make some sort of huge leap in technology or a new energy source.

The energy source is huge. I truly believe we are due huge advance here. Think fusion or something along those lines.
I think the new effective approach you're taking about is actually an old tried and true approach. Let the technology be created, then let demand for the technology drive the change. That's the way it's been done through all of history. Not through policy. I'm with you, all on board with better technology, but don't force it before it's ready, or before most people can afford it.

Granted, not what jeep is doing here. I've said before, and I stand by it, jeep won't ever make the wrangler IFS, but they might try to replace it with an IFS off roader. Could this be there first real attempt? The market will decide, i think.
 

oceanbretzke

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jason
Joined
Mar 17, 2022
Threads
3
Messages
94
Reaction score
93
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2022 Jeep JLU Rubicon Extreme Recon
Build Thread
Link
Occupation
Ocean Engineer / US Navy Diver
I think the new effective approach you're taking about is actually an old tried and true approach. Let the technology be created, then let demand for the technology drive the change. That's the way it's been done through all of history. Not through policy. I'm with you, all on board with better technology, but don't force it before it's ready, or before most people can afford it.

Granted, not what jeep is doing here. I've said before, and I stand by it, jeep won't ever make the wrangler IFS, but they might try to replace it with an IFS off roader. Could this be there first real attempt? The market will decide, i think.
Agreed completely…
 

Sponsored

Jocko

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2018
Threads
4
Messages
433
Reaction score
477
Location
Boston
Vehicle(s)
Hydro Blue 4xe Rubicon
A solid axle still has significant advantages in electrification, especially in heavy-duty applications. You can retain the one-piece construction of a standard axle, which is more durable and simpler than sets of control arms could ever be. It's a little different than what Jeep did with the Magneto - that has a single electric motor bank with a standard manual transmission drivetrain. With Dana/Spicer branching into e-axles for their commercial products, I would expect a production Wrangler EV to have the motors in the axles. The motor banks fit where the differential pumpkin would be, you still have individual power to each wheel, and you retain the tubes and shafts of a standard solid axle, in a package that's about the size and weight of a standard Dana 60.

There's the issue of articulation, too. For an independent-suspension setup to get anywhere near the wheel travel of a solid axle, you have to get creative, like the TAK-4i gas-articulated auto-leveling system on the JLTV (look it up, it's fucking cool). The long control arms aren't as much of an issue if the motors are at the hubs - no CV joints or long shafts - but hub-mounted motors isn't ideal for an offroad vehicle where a lot of the load will be at low speed and you don't have the passive cooling of airflow. Motors in the center of each axle would be much easier to keep cool, without running hoses down control arms.

Also, you could easily retain the mechanical linkages of a standard part-time 4WD setup - even with individual power to the wheels, there's an huge crawling advantage to being able to lock any combination of wheels together.
Hmm I suspect you might know more about this topic than I do. Haha. Well I will say if 2 motors is the way they go, then I'm definitely in favor of keeping it a solid axle!
 

Cutterone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Threads
13
Messages
645
Reaction score
812
Location
NH
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLU Sahara Sarge 6sp
I think without the Bronco, Jeep may have been planning to move to at least IFS, but now its a great differentiator against the Ford. I've read that it was on the table during the JL design phase if not also the JK...As multiple people have stated, if it goes IFS it'll be like every other SUV out there...
 

Asuriyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2021
Threads
2
Messages
209
Reaction score
532
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Vehicle(s)
2023 Sarge Green JLR (6MT)
Hmm I suspect you might know more about this topic than I do. Haha. Well I will say if 2 motors is the way they go, then I'm definitely in favor of keeping it a solid axle!
I am not a mechanical engineer... but I work with a lot of them. :)

Solid axles are the Wrangler's single most defining feature (along with the ladder frame and removable roof), and Jeep has both a strong incentive and the means to build their electrified platform around that design.
 

Bzinsky

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2022
Threads
16
Messages
710
Reaction score
823
Location
Usa
Vehicle(s)
2022 rubicon 4xe
The energy source is huge. I truly believe we are due huge advance here. Think fusion or something along those lines.
Man do I hope they get fusion working.

Without going off on a rant, cliff notes for those who don’t understand how big of deal fusion is.

Fusion is what happens inside the sun, so we know it’s possible. We have been able to create fusion reactions for a long time now, hence the term “h-bomb”

Fusion basically uses hydrogen as fuel, the by product is helium, an inert gas.

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. An single oil tanker of liquid hydrogen contains enough energy to power the united states at it’s current usage for 100,000 years.

Fusion for all intents and purposes, is limitless energy.

Do you remember in science class when we stuck two wires into water and seperated the water into oxygen and hydrogen. It’s easy, it’s just really inefficient.

With fusion, we have so much energy, we could literally modify the gases of our atmosphere at will. Emissions would be irrelevant. We could literally just filter the water of the entire ocean.

Fun fact - We could a simple functioning fusion reactor right now by simply building a 15-20 cubic mile reinforced water tank, and detonate small fusion bombs it. Use the steam as the energy.
 

mnjeeper

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Oct 5, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
936
Reaction score
1,676
Location
MN
Vehicle(s)
98 TJ, 2021 JLUR
People touching on axle end motors and not one mention of portals makes me sad.
Sponsored

 
 



Top