|
Rich Rebuilds is the best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of01p0Q-yUM
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
ratbert90 posted:An extra 220lbs and twice the battery capacity. 4 motors as well. A model 3 battery pack weighs about 1000lbs. So how is doubling the capacity resulting in only 220# extra "reasonable"? The casing itself is about 275# so the total battery weight is 725#. So even if they somehow were able to double the capacity without adding a single # into the structure itself, we should expect an additional 700#. That's without touching on the additional electric motors that are mentioned. ilkhan posted:Weight is also far less important when you can just throw more amps at it at for short durations to counter. It's like any other engineering challenge, there are tradeoffs. Sure you can "throw more amps" at it, but then you sacrifice range heavily. Which you can counter by adding more battery, but then you need to throw more amps to get the same speeds, so you add more battery.... Also electric motors only have so much power; the more dead weight you have the less towing capacity you'll be able to have. Granted that probably doesn't matter for this vehicle since the intended audience would never tow or go off road with the thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
You throw more amps at it when you floor it, not 100% of the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:You throw more amps at it when you floor it, not 100% of the time. If I have two vehicles that have the same motor in it and one weighs 2000# and one weighs 4000# will the 4000# vehicle require more or less energy per unit time to maintain the same speed as the 2000# vehicle? Assume that their crosssections and coefficients for drag are the same and the difference is weight. Once you answer that you can address why you think doubling the battery capacity of a Model 3 would only add 220# lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
Raldikuk posted:A model 3 battery pack weighs about 1000lbs. So how is doubling the capacity resulting in only 220# extra "reasonable"? The casing itself is about 275# so the total battery weight is 725#. So even if they somehow were able to double the capacity without adding a single # into the structure itself, we should expect an additional 700#. That's without touching on the additional electric motors that are mentioned. Maybe they use more aluminum than Tesla? The lightest version of the current F-150 weighs only 4000 pounds with a length of 210 inches. The Rivian is 215 inches and 5840 pounds, that's nearly 2000 pounds heavier, seems reasonable. For comparison the Kona EV with its 64 kwh battery weighs 1000 pounds more than the gasoline Kona with no weight saving measures like using aluminum for the body. From breakdowns of Tesla cars we know they are overly heavy with many unnecessary structures. Rivian's car body could simply be better engineered. Gamesguy fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Dec 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
Raldikuk posted:A model 3 battery pack weighs about 1000lbs. So how is doubling the capacity resulting in only 220# extra "reasonable"? The casing itself is about 275# so the total battery weight is 725#. So even if they somehow were able to double the capacity without adding a single # into the structure itself, we should expect an additional 700#. That's without touching on the additional electric motors that are mentioned. Tesla's battery packs kind of suck as far as energy density, they use less than ideal small cylindrical cells which both reduce energy density and require more structural rigidity in the pack to keep it from breaking. I mean it's not the worst design trade off if you wanted to make a shitload of them cheaply several years ago but there is are very good reasons everyone else isn't making battery packs this way and Tesla is kind of married to Panasonic and the Gigafactory for the foreseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
Yup. Tesla’s battery packs have hundreds of cylindrical cells. Everyone else uses lighter, bigger, flexible pouch cells.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Quit falling for this poo poo. One of the things holding back adoption of electric cars is what shyster salesmen have advertised as being possible being so much better than reality. Stop letting shitbag salesmen run the world because you want to believe in what they're selling. here's a blast from the past. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3461390&userid=158277&perpage=40&pagenumber=5#post477115752  guess what, this thing is still, STILL, STILL in the pre-order phase, down to "722" ft/lbs of torque, and up to 5,500lbs.FOUR THOUSAND POUNDS heavier than a 4 seat rzr 1000. Stop loving falling for it. put rubber on the road or shut the gently caress up. The $35,000 model 3 doesn't exist until the first person to pay $35,000 for one drives their car. The 400 mile, 3 second 0-60 pickup from a silicon valley start up doesn't exist until it has plates on it. stop comparing what does exist against what a salesman says might some day. Powershift fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Dec 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
Gamesguy posted:From breakdowns of Tesla cars we know they are overly heavy with many unnecessary structures. Rivian's car body could simply be better engineered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
 I'll take a ban if a Rivian vehicle is sold to the public with a 400 mile range, 180kwh battery, and 3.0 0-60 in 2020.quote this to accept the opposite. Tell me i'm wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:37
|
|
|
You're pretty angry about a probably non-existent truck.Crotch Fruit posted:Are you trying to say poo poo like the plastic control arm is overweight? I certainly doing it's overengineered, at least not well engineered. 2019 Ram 1500 has plastic control arms too, so it' might not be a bad idea. Would Chrysler let a truck leave the factory with under engineered suspension?  https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2018/01/22/2019-ram-1500-cuts-up-to-nearly-225-lbs-with-high-strength-steel-some-aluminum/ Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Dec 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:43
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:You're pretty angry about a probably non-existent truck. I'm not angry specifically about the truck. I'm angry about the attitude that even brings it into the discussion. We're a society of salesmen. Ruled by, controlled by, and this is just an extension. Its the same reason i go in so hard on musk cultists. quote:Would Chrysler let a truck leave the factory with under engineered suspension? They'd probably sue anybody else who tried for a trademark violation at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I'm not angry specifically about the truck. I'm angry about the attitude that even brings it into the discussion. Nobody gives a poo poo about the loving truck. Their claims seem superficially plausible - that is all anyone is arguing. It remains to be seen what they can actually do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:01
|
|
|
I don’t care about the truck but it’s pretty funny to see Powershift riled up some about some vapor ware vehicle
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
big crush on Chad OMG posted:I don’t care about the truck but it’s pretty funny to see Powershift riled up some about some vapor ware vehicle I'm still pissed about the Carbon Motors E7 there were supposed to be a whole bunch of 400hp 40mpg diesel RWD cop cars everywhere by now 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:06
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I'm still pissed about the Carbon Motors E7 WHERE IS MY GOD drat GTD? WHERE IS IT VW?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Was Carbon Motors not a real car? I thought it was, it didn't have any breakthrough technology or anything it was just a dumb idea that made no economic sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:10
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Was Carbon Motors not a real car? I thought it was, it didn't have any breakthrough technology or anything it was just a dumb idea that made no economic sense. Oh, no, it was totally real, and it was going to have a BMW diesel only with more power, better performance and better fuel economy. Pre-order now! Just note that your 100% refundable deposit will be repaid by check by Big Donnie's King Sized Dildos, so cash that check if you really want to explain it to your boss.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Oh, no, it was totally real, and it was going to have a BMW diesel only with more power, better performance and better fuel economy. I'm pretty sure the much, much, much larger issue is the idea that police departments would make purchasing decisions based on objective needs and technical data. But cops don't drive around in Honda Civics, they drive around in Ford SUVs that hotbox them with CO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Three Olives posted:I'm pretty sure the much, much, much larger issue is the idea that police departments would make purchasing decisions based on objective needs and technical data. but they had over 10,000 preorders! https://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/12/carbon-motors-reports-10-000-pre-orders-for-diesel-powered-e7-po
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 06:53
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Would Chrysler let a truck leave the factory with under engineered suspension? This part IS a joke, right? Chrysler lets vehicles leave the factory with all kinds of poo poo hosed up. Edit: Oh, ok good. Godholio fucked around with this message at 07:22 on Dec 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 07:18
|
|
|
Godholio posted:This part IS a joke, right? Chrysler lets vehicles leave the factory with all kinds of poo poo hosed up. I think he was jokingly referring to that small period between 1994 and 2007 when dodge trucks had a notorious reputation for the front suspension completely collapsing every 60,000 miles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 07:21
|
|
|
Powershift posted:but they had over 10,000 preorders! https://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/12/carbon-motors-reports-10-000-pre-orders-for-diesel-powered-e7-po Gee, I wonder what significant financial event was about to happen that would negatively impact new startups right about that time. If only I could remember...
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 14:09
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I think he was jokingly referring to that small period between 1994 and 2007 when dodge trucks had a notorious reputation for the front suspension completely collapsing every 60,000 miles. Good times now they only last 30,000 miles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Duck and Cover posted:It is ugly. I have spoken and so shall it be. If a CUV/tall hatchback body is what's necessary to make the necessary room for batteries, I'm OK with that. Ideally most people should be using electric public transit and bicycles, but this is acceptable for those who can't. E: And if rebranding tall hatchbacks as "CUVs" is what it takes to make people actually buy boxy little practical cars, I'm all for that as well. KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Dec 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
Raldikuk posted:If I have two vehicles that have the same motor in it and one weighs 2000# and one weighs 4000# will the 4000# vehicle require more or less energy per unit time to maintain the same speed as the 2000# vehicle? Assume that their crosssections and coefficients for drag are the same and the difference is weight. Maybe I'm confused on the argument, but on a flat road, same Cd and area at constant speed means same drag, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Both cars will have the same aerodynamic drag, yes, and will both require the same amount of engine/motor power to counteract this drag when maintaining a constant speed. The heavier car will coast longer when you turn the engine off, though, because it has more inertia. In reality it's not quite that clean; the heavier car will probably have increased driveline drag (wider tire contact patches, more load on bearings, etc), which will require anywhere from a touch more to significantly more power to counteract. A Nissan Leaf containing a thousand pounds of sandbags will draw more power in cruise than a Nissan Leaf containing only the driver. A more important factor when discussing electric vehicles' weight is the energy required to accelerate it. Bringing a large mass up to speed in some fixed time takes more power than accelerating a small mass to the same speed in the same time. So your Leaf full of sandbags is going to burn a ton more juice keeping up with traffic than the empty one will. You get some of that back through regeneration (the heavier car having more kinetic energy to return to the batteries), but of course due to system losses and battery limits you'll never recapture 100%. tl;dr if you overinflated the tires and drove like a grandma then you might be able to make your heavy car draw the same power per mile as a light car, at least to within a small margin Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Dec 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Ulf posted:Motorcycle post: Hell yeah! Get the Zero app and change the settings to 100% torque, 100% regen for the world’s smoothest v-twin feel. The SR I test rode was a shitload of fun, and it was a heavy fight in my head between the FXS and the SR. Good call on the charge tank, too. The extra battery doesn’t make sense unless you live in an EV charging desert. The 6kW charging is insane and I wish I had something close to that for mine, it’d make a Sunday morning in the mountains a lot less hair-raising.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Little track review of the Mountain Pass Performance Tesla Model 3 Basically just brakes, coilovers, and 18x10 square with 275 RE71Rs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0nZpJkcGYM
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Ola posted:Rich Rebuilds is the best.  Just watched this follow up video, dude just can not handle the fact that people called him out on his dangerously cavalier attitude in the first one Even after (briefly) explaining what went wrong in this one, he gets right back to "lol i blew up some batteries and no one got hurt, nbd haters gonna hate!" He's also extremely dismissive of the idea that he, being someone high profile in the burgeoning DIY EV community, has a responsibility to that community to set a good example. It's one thing for him to build a gimmicky toy like this which lacks basic safety systems (already bad imo), it's another for him to then be so casual when it burns down on him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Here is my capsule review of a weekend with a Model 3 which I posted in the yospos tesla thread. I will save you from having to read that as it's one of the most insane groupthink brainworms threads I have read in eleven years on these here forums.KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:man this car handles correct. it's a perfect balance of light, tight, and responsive. it's most definitely better than every audi and bmw i've driven, and i fucken love audis. together with the no-transmission acceleration and instant torque, this is a very addicting car to drive. the suspension is similarly balanced between comfort and "sport", it both handles rough roads well and corners right. there's almost no bodyroll, but thats more a center-of-gravity thing with the battery "skateboard." braking is good, i might like more sensitivity though - like if i so much as rest my foot on the brake pedal on my a6, it engages, and im into that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Road noise is my biggest complaint with my 2016 S too. I don’t know why they neglected it (weight?) but I wish they hadn’t.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
I bet I could make a lot of money selling a speed-indexed white noise generator for Teslas. Other manufacturers just pipe in fake engine noise to help with their NVH 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Gonna have to move to higher profile tires, more rubber in suspension bushings / strut mount, and more sound deadening to cover up noise normally handled by engine noise. Rip handling / performance / efficiency.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Ulf posted:I bet I could make a lot of money selling a speed-indexed white noise generator for Teslas. A lot of old Chevys have a stereo that automatically turns up the volume the faster you're going. I can't imagine that's a hard feature to add to the Tesla entertainment stack if it's not already there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 03:57
|
|
|
My '11 Jetta did it, too. Patent licensing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:A lot of old Chevys have a stereo that automatically turns up the volume the faster you're going. I can't imagine that's a hard feature to add to the Tesla entertainment stack if it's not already there. You don't know what else is coded into that same system though. You don't want the seat to start moving forward the faster you go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
Speed sensitive volume is pretty basic stuff these days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 06:22
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Speed sensitive volume is pretty basic stuff these days. I’d be surprised if you could find a single (non Tesla) car that doesn’t have it, I mean my basic model 05 Mazda 3 does...
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 07:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
In my test drive, the guy said that the Model S didn’t need it because the engine didn’t really get louder. So close.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2018 09:05
|
|