Hi everyone,

Never heard of this before until someone posted a link to it earlier. Looks like it was used on E-vans in the 1970s.

The VEMCO V-Drive System

Has anyone owned or worked on a van with this system? Shame it's not available today...current conversions require lifting the van for the front axle to clear. This system kept the van at the factory ride height which has lots of advantages.

 

Wow---in concept that's exceptionally cool!

With Quigley and other 4WD converters they require significant lifting in order to accommodate their systems. I frequent a board where 4WD is almost a must have in the small camper/RV field so the sky-high versions are all I've ever seen.

I wonder how the coming Transit might benefit from something like this being available in the after market? Also wondering what Mark Kovolsky thinks of this, he with the FoMoCo transmission experience that also includes Abrams tanks? What challenges might it place on the drive train?

 

I would like to see in-wheel electric motors added to either front or rear wheel drive systems but without all the mechanical compexity of a normal 4wd upfit.

Protean and others are working on the technology, and it seems to me that the Transit would be a good target market for the units.

70-100 added horsepower per wheel. That aint too shabby as an add-on system!

Of course the vehicle batteries would need to be upgraded by a wide margin, but a Transit or any full size van has lots of room.



Protean Launches Production In-Wheel Electric Motor

 

That's an interesting read TX---thanks for the link!

Not sure if either system is better than the other but for my money I'd want the mechanic version---for some reason the electric drive seems overly complex, very spendy and probably a bear to maintain too.

Then again just this year I go DSL (moved from dial-up ISP) so maybe partially a techno-phobe here?

 

That is kind of a neat concept. I've been thinking for awhile now how that would be great to make hybrid cars AWD. It would be a good fit because they already have the electrical framework that would be needed to drive the wheel motors.

In addition to the benefit of four wheel drive, they could be used to recover energy previously lost to the friction brakes. Imagine an inexpensive 4WD conversion that improved city fuel economy by 30% or more.

 

Maybe a bit too theoretical but if such a system is on a vehicle used mostly for long hauls how would it benefit from the energy recovery scheme?

 

It wouldn't be as significant. I've learned lots more about it since buying a Prius earlier this year, and that uses regenerative braking as a large part of why it gets such good gas mileage. On cruise control on the highway it recovers energy going down hills to prevent the car from exceeding the set speed as well as any time you touch the brake pedal. Just think of all of the energy that's wasted when you hit the brakes, this is what is able to be recovered.

The biggest gain would be for those who brake a lot, which typically means those who drive in the city. Of course the AWD benefits would be self explanatory for those who drive in bad weather or on unpaved surfaces.

 

With the energy recovery bit that type drive would be a huge benefit for city delivery fleets; FedEx, UPS etc etc. In a larger vehicle like a Transit there'd be more than enough room for extra batteries.

Of course adding somewhere near 100# to each front wheel would make suspension maintenance and alignments much more important.

Still an interesting idea........!

 

Some hybrids get better fuel mileage in town than they do on the road, and its all because of the lower speeds, and the regenerative braking that returns kinetic energy during braking back into the batteries.

I like the idea as an upfit for AWD during low traction situations, the regen braking would be a bonus...although I'm not sure the fuel mileage gains would ever offset the cost of the motors and the batteries and electronics needed.

I was actually pleasantly surprised at how well my E-250 worked on the snow and ice we got yesterday...that limited slip diff is very noticeable....my old pickup, which had a standard open diff, always spun one wheel when the throttle was applied on slippery ice covered roads.

If pancake wheel motors were added to the front, I can only assume the traction improvement would be amazing.

 

I'd love to drive either one of these configurations, would be great if they could be compared side-by-side.

I'll have to dig a bit into the Vemco system and why it never took off or was developed further.

 

Let me make a few guesses:

Too expensive, maintenance too involved, handing issues, little perceived benefit by consumers, and probably a big one at the time, fuel mileage losses. These were passenger cars, after all, not big honkin 4x4's where those things dont matter as much.

But I'm just guessing.