EZGO DCS Motor option

[ubjl02]

Hello all, i am rebuilding a 96 ezgo dcs cart that got some flood damage. i got the Alltrax DCX 500 controller, did some cleaning and the cart worked. So i tore it down to do further cleaning and replace bad wiring. i was advised to pull the motor and clean it up as well. Si i did, and i was surprised at the amount of crud that came out of it. i pull the back of the motor off as well to find a broken brush holder and some corrosion. i made the decision to have plum quick rebuild it, but fedex lost my motor on the way there. So now i am out a motor, and have to get a new one. I have looked at many at different web sites. The factory replacement from EZGO 73124g01 is on sale right now for $630. Should i go with that or try a D&D motor or some other type?
Thanks, Bobby

1996 ezgo DCS 36v
alltrax 500
no lift
cargo box
used for : yard work, golf, cruising the neighborhood" hilly"

[JohnnieB]

Go with an Admiral B2 (torque) or D2 (speed) for about $170 less and get more bang for the buck.
http://www.cartsunlimited.net/golf-cart-motors.html
Motors for DCS at bottom of linked page.

Or go with a D&D with similar less expense.

[ubjl02]

ok thanks. checking their site now

[scottyb]

Wow - $630 for 2.5 hp OEM
or $459 for 8 hp Admiral B2, .....hmmmm?

Admiral is a good match for your XCT control, we have the field map for that too.

[ubjl02]

better options is what i was looking for. When i asked ezgo about the specs of that motor they said it was 11 hp. dont know where he got that from......

Thanks Scottie

[gornoman]

There is no HP measurement standard for these motors. The quoted numbers are self generated. Only thing the numbers are good for is to differentiate between motor models by the same manufacturer.

[scottyb]

I have never heard of a stock motor rated above 3.5 hp All Ezgo TXT motors were 2.5 hp.

[cgtech]

Originally Posted by gornoman

There is no HP measurement standard for these motors. The quoted numbers are self generated. Only thing the numbers are good for is to differentiate between motor models by the same manufacturer.

Yep, all the numbers should be taken "with a grain of salt", a motor is rated by the manufacturer in a way that looks best for them usually. Continuous horsepower is different than how much horsepower you can make for one millisecond when max amps are applied under perfect conditions. Every motors HP is affected by how much power it is afforded, and what rpm it is turning when the reading is taken. (your current setup, or planned setup, plays a big factor in this). I have seen two motors that perform similarly in real use have ratings that were very different with the "HP rating". Seen "6 hp" motors outperform "14 hp" motors in the same application. When I see huge "stupid numbers" listed online, I shrug my head. Yep, that motor makes "triple the horsepower" with only a motor swap, nah, buyer beware the HP number game. Make a plan, talk it over with people who are experienced (not "your neighbors buddy") before you drop cash. Spend the $ to aim for the big picture that you want, not the highest HP number you see.

[BobBoyce]

Originally Posted by cgtech

Yep, all the numbers should be taken "with a grain of salt", a motor is rated by the manufacturer in a way that looks best for them usually. Continuous horsepower is different than how much horsepower you can make for one millisecond when max amps are applied under perfect conditions. Every motors HP is affected by how much power it is afforded, and what rpm it is turning when the reading is taken. (your current setup, or planned setup, plays a big factor in this). I have seen two motors that perform similarly in real use have ratings that were very different with the "HP rating". Seen "6 hp" motors outperform "14 hp" motors in the same application. When I see huge "stupid numbers" listed online, I shrug my head. Yep, that motor makes "triple the horsepower" with only a motor swap, nah, buyer beware the HP number game. Make a plan, talk it over with people who are experienced (not "your neighbors buddy") before you drop cash. Spend the $ to aim for the big picture that you want, not the highest HP number you see.

Electric motors SHOULD always be rated based upon the maximum continious mechanical horsepower (rpm/torque) that it can develop without overheating. At least that is the way electric motors used to be rated. Fueled engines were typically rated in peak horsepower, which is not usually sustainable for long periods of time without overheat and/or damage. Some electric motor manufacturers/rebuilders/modifiers began borrowing the fueled engine concept of horsepower ratings, and rating them in peak horsepower. The chinese, not to be outdone, began a new rating system based upon the european concept of power (like latent fuel energy or applied electrical energy, converted into watts) consumed, not mechanical output energy. This means that a 50% efficient induction motor can now boast as high or higher of a horsepower rating as a 98% efficient rating rare earth magnet motor, even though they are way different in the efficiency of converting that applied electrical energy to mechanical energy. All this has done is created greater confusion. I prefer the original rating system, it used to keep everyone more honest.

Bob

[mutant]

Originally Posted by BobBoyce

Electric motors SHOULD always be rated based upon the maximum continious mechanical horsepower (rpm/torque) that it can develop without overheating. At least that is the way electric motors used to be rated. Fueled engines were typically rated in peak horsepower, which is not usually sustainable for long periods of time without overheat and/or damage. Some electric motor manufacturers/rebuilders/modifiers began borrowing the fueled engine concept of horsepower ratings, and rating them in peak horsepower. The chinese, not to be outdone, began a new rating system based upon the european concept of power (like latent fuel energy or applied electrical energy, converted into watts) consumed, not mechanical output energy. This means that a 50% efficient induction motor can now boast as high or higher of a horsepower rating as a 98% efficient rating rare earth magnet motor, even though they are way different in the efficiency of converting that applied electrical energy to mechanical energy. All this has done is created greater confusion. I prefer the original rating system, it used to keep everyone more honest.

Bob

this is very similar to tire wear ratings by tire manufacturers use-largely self generated-buyer beware........