"Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura" (sundowne36)
08/22/2013 at 06:35 • Filed to: Boredom, Electric, All Wheel Drive, AWD
0
6|
"Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura" (sundowne36)
08/22/2013 at 06:35 • Filed to: Boredom, Electric, All Wheel Drive, AWD | 0
| 6 |
Fired up Photoshop and then remembered an interesting argument about electric vehicles and their ideal AWD platforms, so long story short; I made a difference and compromise picture.
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! for huge resolution.
GhostZ
> Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
08/22/2013 at 07:26 |
|
That "compromise" is exactly what Mercedes has in the SLS electric drive, and it's beautiful.
Unfortunately, it's also the most expensive and difficult of the three to do. They have to create a new carbon fiber chassis and stuff the batteries inside the spine of the car to fit everything low enough that its still sporting.
|
Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
> GhostZ
08/22/2013 at 07:29 |
|
I thought their motors were on the axles and not in between?
|
GhostZ
> Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
08/22/2013 at 07:40 |
|
The motors are on the axles, I glanced at the photo and didn't look close enough. I thought the image was pointing out battery location, not motor location. It's still pretty early in the morning where I am.
HammerheadFistpunch
> Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
08/22/2013 at 12:47 |
|
There really is only one way to do it right and its the per axle ideal. Its easier, less complex and may even be cheaper.
|
Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
> HammerheadFistpunch
08/22/2013 at 19:37 |
|
Except having to develop a completely unique suspension system and high running costs per motor.
|
HammerheadFistpunch
> Satoshi "Zipang" Katsura
08/22/2013 at 20:10 |
|
why a new suspension system? they aren't wheel mounted, the would use CV joints just like sending it from a diff would. As for the running costs per motor...im not quite sure what you mean there. you have the motor running all the time, yes, but you would have to run 2 larger motors running all the time too(or one big one), plus have to deal with driveline losses. Electric motors are 95% efficient at turning electricity into rotational motion, so why is 4 smaller motors running at 95% worse than 2 larger motors running at 95% plus driveline losses?