REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Auto Chat

Vancouver Auto Chat 2016 VAC Community Head Moderator: Raid3n

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-14-2020, 04:49 PM   #26
RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
 
Hehe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: YVR/TPE
Posts: 4,769
Thanked 2,852 Times in 1,225 Posts
Failed 616 Times in 193 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp View Post
So what would a "grounds up" EV look like then? Really long and low to the ground? A giant donut with a seat in the middle? What are you thinking of here?
The idea is that they need to embrace the characteristics of EV:

Low center of gravity (skateboard with batteries)
Weight (batteries, pending some revolutionary tech, are going to be heavy)
Aerodynamic (crucial because every bit counts, it's +or- 1% here and there... but when you add everything up, it can be make it or break it point)
Much fewer parts from tens of thousands to hundreds
No more transmission components that go through the middle of car (again, skateboard)

By taking these points, a designer should start looking what need to be taken OUT of a car design rather than what go in to fit.

Grill is out. Drag needs to be minimized. You don't even really need axles (Rivian I believe runs 4 independent motors to move each wheel). So, it's possible that the shape no longer needs to be a "H" form to be optimal. It was something optimal for ICE, but EV can go beyond that. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if someone came up with a design that's like BB-8 droid (wheel/s only at the bottom with the cabin on top). That gives you an idea how wild things can run for EV.
Advertisement
__________________
Nothing for now
Hehe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2020, 05:14 PM   #27
"They call me Bowser...RawR!"
 
!LittleDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,226
Thanked 919 Times in 369 Posts
Failed 59 Times in 30 Posts
You're not taking into account pedestrian safety. Current cars have high noses so pedestrians land on the hood instead of scooping them up and over the car. Cybertruck looks like it can sheer off someone's arm at 2mph with those sharp corners. Safety isn't just about vehicle to vehicle impact.
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
!LittleDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-14-2020, 06:08 PM   #28
RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
 
Hehe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: YVR/TPE
Posts: 4,769
Thanked 2,852 Times in 1,225 Posts
Failed 616 Times in 193 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by !LittleDragon View Post
You're not taking into account pedestrian safety. Current cars have high noses so pedestrians land on the hood instead of scooping them up and over the car. Cybertruck looks like it can sheer off someone's arm at 2mph with those sharp corners. Safety isn't just about vehicle to vehicle impact.
I'm not suggesting CT is perfect. I was just saying that EVs, being so different than their ICE counterparts no longer need to be bounded by the design principles of ICE cars. You can achieve similar safety requirements by taking those points in I'm sure. But right now, they are just being lazy... because they have been doing it certain way for almost 100yrs... and they never thought about doing it some other way.

The most costly few words in business: we have been doing this way forever.
__________________
Nothing for now
Hehe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2020, 07:54 PM   #29
"They call me Bowser...RawR!"
 
!LittleDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,226
Thanked 919 Times in 369 Posts
Failed 59 Times in 30 Posts
Mid engine cars have absolutely no need for such a long hood, just enough for some mechanicals like steering and some electronics but they still have decently long front ends. It's something relatively soft for pedestrians to land on.

Maybe after 100 years, that's what they settled on as the best compromise? The most efficient shape is obviously the airplane wing but someone likely won't survive being hit by one of those. You also won't be able to fit much in the back. Today's car designs are a compromise for everything after decades of trying various designs. Practicality, safety and efficiency.

I don't think you're going to see major changes to shapes of cars change until there's massive advancements in material sciences. What propels it isn't big enough of a change, it's still a big hunk of metal. Being electric can arguably more dangerous because there's a lot more mass carrying more momentum making it harder to stop quickly.
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke

Last edited by !LittleDragon; 11-14-2020 at 08:21 PM.
!LittleDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net