Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 22, 2015 at 23:00 history bounty ended DucatiKiller
Dec 18, 2015 at 17:33 comment added race fever The question does leave room for interpretation. You mention reliability. Which I didn't take into account. I'd say it would be less reliable due to having more points of failure. Could we close this question? Its driving me insane. :)
Dec 18, 2015 at 17:06 comment added DucatiKiller I'm not sure I can see the logic that simply because it has two motors or these additional parts that there would be a failure in the supply chain. It's too implicit. I suppose it puts more stress on the supply chain but there is no guaranteed failure. as well, I see the question as a pro's/con's for performance, reliability, etc. rather than a manufacturing question.
Dec 18, 2015 at 17:01 comment added race fever I think that the point I brought up about the logistic chain is being missed. The question is about a production vehicle. Not a prototype. I'm taking into account the benefits of efficiency and the impact on the supply chain and cost. If the question were for a prototype vehicle that does not need to meet deadlines and regulations then we could expand on efficiency. Maybe the OP could make the question without that explicit detail?
Dec 18, 2015 at 16:37 comment added DucatiKiller I think there is clear advantage in the removal of a torque converter. If you didn't have a diff there is less power loss and the motors can be controlled independently. The independent control is reduced complexity in that aspect. I don't necessarily think there is a right answer to this questions as there are possible multiple viewpoints to it. The chassis twisting component is simply shoring up certain points where force may twist it but at the end of the day, apply all the force you want, it won't exceed the friction coefficient of traction between the road and the tires.
Dec 18, 2015 at 16:19 history answered race fever CC BY-SA 3.0