MD-Tech PHEV Conversion Kit

In the past there was a distinct lack of version control and factory acceptance testing. What exactly was going on at Enginer that allowed this to happen is open to speculation. Suffice to say that without version control you cannot have traceable test results. Specifications and service instructions were missing but people still bought the kit, probably due to a lack of options in the market. The early owners were pioneers who were looking for a way to make a plug-in Hybrid for a low price.

MD-Tech have spent a lot of time and effort to develop the kit from their investigations of the problems.
The new MD-Tech BMS has a millivolt, 0.001v accuracy. That is quite an achievement.

MD-Tech are not sitting still; a new automatic BMS calibration procedure will also take the time out of calibrating BMS readings. These are innovative ideas. Backed up by version control and test campaigns.

Judgment should be reserved. The kit will make a comeback as long as vehicle manufacturers continue to build Hybrid cars and Electric cars with only one traction battery system. There are already plenty of vehicles dropping in price that will make great conversions in years to come. MD-Tech are here to stay and will continue to improve their kits.

 

Defective against which requirements, were there any? Taking a kit still in development to market without Factory Acceptance Testing is recipe for disaster. No requirements +no requirement testing = "no defective product", you are hacking around.
Reputations can be fixed by making better products. When you find you have a defective product you issue a worldwide recall and fix the issues.

Lopez has a good question, what patents?

MD-Tech have been making Power inverters for many years before Enginer. MD-tech have a new BMS that has been independently designed, the specs are different to Enginer.
That does lead to the question of who designed what originally. I had a call from Slovenia, a guy has been running a converter in his car for 7 years, built by MD-Tech, he has had no problems.

The idea for a plug-in kit came from Calcars, pre-dating Enginer by many years.

The BMS design broke Enginer. Who designed that?

 

Still no patent information?

On the question of warranty there are two points, the first is suspicious.
Enginer says they are going out of business but still taking orders and not providing any warranty support. This might be incorrect but it is certainly the opinion of the most senior Installers on the Installers Forum of the Enginer website, which I am now banned from.

The second issue is, what were the warranty conditions with MD-Tech?
It is difficult to claim a warranty for a BMS that was working perfectly well but damaging batteries prematurely.
A claim can be disputed when there is no specification of voltage reading accuracy and no description of balancing specifications. It is very difficult to claim warranty under these conditions which Enginer allowed to prevail. Which is why requirements, specifications, tests and version control are important.

Another warranty problem Enginer had was allowing Installers to play around with the Converter settings to achieve power output that had not been thoroughly tested.
MD-Tech has the strategy to make different configurations of converters. So that no matter what the Installer does with output controls it cannot damage the Converter. MD-Tech fixed the problem.

There is plenty of evidence that MD-Tech were replacing parts failed under warranty, and were working to resolve the issues. Which warranty claims did they refuse and on what basis? If the problems you are referring to were systemic to the Kit, for example Enginer branded BMS ,(as it is today), causing premature battery failure, then this is not a warranty/ parts failure this is design failure, again - a worldwide recall needed to be issued and the problem fixed. But without proper version control how do you issue a recall? If the Enginer distribution contract did not describe clearly the recall conditions and obligations then it is very important to make sure that careful inspection of test plans and test results are performed to avoid getting in to this situation in the first place. But the Enginer BMS still needs development, battery measuring accuracy and balancing are issues that need to be resolved.

You cannot "claim" against warranty by way of refusing to pay for a shipment and then switching to another manufacturer, "Nanjing Pride Technologies" . But Enginer don't use Nanjing Pride Tech any more, why is that? Did Enginer fail to pay them for a shipment?

If MD-Tech refuse to honour warranty, did you file any legal action against them? This is unclear but the warrant out for your arrest by the Shanghai police for non-payment to MD-Tech is an issue that suggests Enginer could not prove failure to comply with warranty obligations and instead opted for non-payment which led to court action. If this situation has changed since January 2013, please provide the business premises address where you can be contacted directly.

What is the Enginer official place of business in China and who is the owner?
Rumour has it that Dimitri bought the company.

As you know we had discussed the police warrant issue in "Private" with Mr Fang, of MD-Tech and you were given the option to resolve the issue with MD-Tech but you never wrote to them again.

You did not bring up the issue of patents during those conversations because Mr Fang knows that Enginer do not have any. You brought up the issue of copyright, a case you failed to prove; Plug-in Kits were not your idea originally. MD-Tech claim you came to them with an idea only, nothing else. But I cannot prove that, and you fail to provide any official documentation to counter their claims.
The current situation is that MD-Tech now build a kit with different components, different current tracing and different specifications. It would be very difficult to claim a copyright issue. We had this conversation already and you did not contest it further.

Enginer were my first choice for developing the kit for the European market. But refused to engage in a testing plan that provided any confidence that any re-engineering required would be done. The reason given was "Not enough business in Europe", that argument was circular. If you don't get certification you re not going to get a legal distributor.

MD-Tech welcomed the European opportunity with open arms. They engaged in Certification testing (using UN and EU directives as the requirements). Testing and re-engineering with their the very well equipped EMC labs at Tongji University.

Enginer need to get the E-Mark certification. Testing is expensive. Where is the development at Enginer? What issues are bring worked on to improve the product and what is the schedule for their release?

If MD-Tech are showing Enginer the way to go, then at least remain competitive from an Engineering standpoint. New customers want to know that issues have been fixed and the the kit works well. Do that.

 

Assumption is the mother of all .... ... .

Is there warranty support now from new Enginer products? Not according to Enginer Forums.

MD-Tech ship faulty parts back to China at their expense, they do now any ways.

Difficult to pay royalties when no patent information is provided after repeated requests.

Difficult to pay copyright when it is unclear who designed what.

Present the documentation please.

It has been repeatedly asked for and has never been provided. Not one piece of documentation.

I will happily pay royalties if they are due.

 

I posted the method how to do this on the Enginer Installers forum, HVC to 3.65V. If you want it lower please send me an email.

Regards
Sushp