Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 283 posts

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#141

Post by benj111 »

deepGem wrote: post #15
devnulll wrote: post #4

> Putting a motor on each wheel — or at least one on each axle — could translate into hair-raising EV driving performance. I don't understand this. My Plaid Tesla has a motor on each of the rear axles, and it's direct coupled to the wheel. The already are doing torque vectoring. Like all things in engineering, the trade-off's are critical. This article doesn't go at all into the pros/cons of the approach Tesla (and o…

If you use 1 motor per wheel, at full torque you don't have double the power but the same power as one motor on the axle. This is the fundamental disadvantage of using one motor for each wheel, which is probably why Tesla engineers didn't pursue this route. In addition, the extra weight also adds up, no matter how tiny the motor is. Essentially you are making each wheel heavier, adding to suspension woes. The greates…

>If you use 1 motor per wheel, at full torque you don't have double the power but the same power as one motor on the axle.

That's like saying if you double the power of an engine you get the same power at the wheels? The limiting factor is the grip. The more power you add the more you get out until that limit is reached.

But anyway, I'm not sure the one motor per wheel is all about more power. You could use 2 smaller motors instead of one large one. And then you can get rid of the axle and diff which are weighty items, so I don't think it's necssarily the heavier solution.

Plus there's ground clearance. The diff is often the lowest point in an offroader. A motor at each wheel removes that limitation.

Then you've got packaging. A centrally mounted motor uses space that could be used for cabin space or batteries. Hub motors are using otherwise dead space.

Then there's reliability. If you lose one motor you've still got another to get you somewhere, and it's probably easier to replace too.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#142

Post by saiya-jin »

ajmurmann wrote: post #106
albertopv wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you buy a Ferrari you buy an experience, history etc, engine sound is good part of that experience. No way Ferrari will be banned for noise or pollution. On road a Ferrari noise is quite low when running low speed. Pollution is non existent for cars that drive few kms per year.

Honda Civic Type Rs have a speaker system that makes more impressive engine sounds for the driver. Maybe Ferrari can go with that

nobody who buys Ferrari for what the brand represents and delivers is accepting this fake approach, thats for cheap brands

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#143

Post by benj111 »

albertopv wrote: post #81
hooloovoo_zoo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ferrari has no choice. They’ll eventually be banned on noise pollution grounds/ be too low performance to be considered super cars if they stick with internal combustion.

When you buy a Ferrari you buy an experience, history etc, engine sound is good part of that experience. No way Ferrari will be banned for noise or pollution. On road a Ferrari noise is quite low when running low speed. Pollution is non existent for cars that drive few kms per year.

When everyone has EVs the sound of any IC is going to become increasingly noticeable. I can see a point where IC vehicles are banned from cities on noise grounds alone.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#144

Post by zuhsetaqi »

judge2020 wrote: post #25
clouddrover wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a general rule, if Tesla isn't doing it already I suspect it's either not economically feasible, difficult to manufacture, or otherwise has drawbacks they've judged signifigant. That's not a very good rule. There a lots of things Tesla doesn't do. - Tesla doesn't do battery swaps, but NIO does. NIO's done it 10 million times: https://www.nio.com/blog/nio-users-china-have-completed-10-m... - Tesla doesn't do 350…

Technically all of those are covered under "otherwise has drawbacks they've judged significant", but I think they meant "in the realm of EV performance": the Plaid is still the fastest car you can buy without dropping a half million on a SF90 or even more on a limited-run supercar.

It's the fastest in acceleration. Bring it to the Nürburgring and it's by far not the fastest car. Even the Porsche Taycan Turbo S is more than 2 seconds faster[0]. Driving quality or how good a car is is not defined by how fast a car can accelerate.

[0] https://www.nuerburgring.de/info/nuerburgring/records

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#145

Post by ezconnect »

devnulll wrote: post #4

> Putting a motor on each wheel — or at least one on each axle — could translate into hair-raising EV driving performance. I don't understand this. My Plaid Tesla has a motor on each of the rear axles, and it's direct coupled to the wheel. The already are doing torque vectoring. Like all things in engineering, the trade-off's are critical. This article doesn't go at all into the pros/cons of the approach Tesla (and o…

If the motor is on the wheel it will have less torque and power. Unless there is a new technology motor that can rival a long fat motor in torque and power, I doubt we can see this in high performance electric vehicles. Small city cars on very short distance this is feasible because we gain a bit of space on a tiny car.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#146

Post by jillesvangurp »

benj111 wrote: post #130
jillesvangurp wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several cars that use this already. The issue is not so much ignored; but been dealt with. Multiple EV manufacturers have now successfully used this technology in vehicles. It seems the benefits outweigh the theoretical downsides. Of course the question remains what happens in a high performance car at extreme speeds. But presumably, Ferrari and Mercedes know what they are doing and have considered this as…

You have the wheel separate to the motor, so you just replace the wheel? Just like you don't currently have to remove the brakes when you change a wheel.

Not if the motor is part of the wheel.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#147

Post by ZeroGravitas »

rmason wrote: post #122
xbmcuser wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partly I agree and its the reason I have been disappointed specially in Toyota trying to protect it cash cow and supply chain. They are not really getting into electric cars. Even today they are trying to hedge with hydrogen fuel cars its as they feel hydrogen cars will require the least amount of changes for their supply chain.

Toyota made the largest bet on hydrogen of any car manufacturer. They stubbornly stuck to it and were slow in developing EV's. They're playing fast catchup but will be a few years behind everyone else. What that costs them in market share is anyone's guess. I thought the laggard would be Chrysler/Stellantis but they're getting set to introduce a number of models starting next year. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/toy…

It seems to be a Japanese thing, I seem to recall that perhaps the Japanese government thought they might have some Methane Hydrate reserves under the sea and thought it would be strategic to pivot towards Hydrogen from this to replace gasoline.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Environment/Climate-Change...

Not a totally crazy idea, but has probably temporarily held them back by distracting them from EVs.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#148

Post by rsynnott »

devnulll wrote: post #4

> Putting a motor on each wheel — or at least one on each axle — could translate into hair-raising EV driving performance. I don't understand this. My Plaid Tesla has a motor on each of the rear axles, and it's direct coupled to the wheel. The already are doing torque vectoring. Like all things in engineering, the trade-off's are critical. This article doesn't go at all into the pros/cons of the approach Tesla (and o…

> As a general rule, if Tesla isn't doing it already I suspect it's either not economically feasible, difficult to manufacture, or otherwise has drawbacks they've judged signifigant.

This company really has made Jobs' reality distortion field pale in comparison.

Without comment on the specific innovation in the article, it's a _very_ weird assumption that all innovation in a field would stem from one company. That's simply not how things generally work.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#149

Post by dmitriid »

awestroke wrote: post #79
gridder wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Tesla doesn’t offer LiDAR sensors, even if it’s clearly the best technology to use for the autopilot.

Because it is prohibitively expensive, and you get more data with multiple cameras than with one single lidar

> you get more data with multiple cameras than with one single lidar

Until you're at night in the snow/dirt.

Re: Mercedes and Ferrari’s edge in the electric car age: high-end axial motors

#150

Post by lloeki »

benj111 wrote: post #132
shrubble wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mercedes 300SL, the Gull Wing of 1954, already had inboard-mounted brakes to reduce unpsrung weight. I would assume that any Mercedes engineer would be familiar with the concept...

The 2cv did this as well. I'm undecided if this supports your argument though.

Suspension design on the 2cv was a very specific consequence of the "egg" design brief:

> This suspension design ensured the road wheels followed ground contours underneath them closely, while insulating the vehicle from shocks, enabling the 2CV to be driven over a ploughed field without breaking any eggs, as its design brief required.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citroën_2CV#Suspension

Post reply on HN