RE: MG Cyberster revealed ahead of UK debut in 2024
Discussion
carlo996 said:
Lotus Exige 1100Kg, call it 1200 kgs if you like.
Quite a lot heavier than my Elise then. Personally, I do care about weight, but for me once it's much more than a ton, it's academic. You've had to make the big compromises by then. Certainly my Z4M is too lardy for my taste as a sports car. My 335D is the weight of a high spec Tesla Model 3, but it's a family barge, I don't care.GT9 said:
nickfrog said:
What I would love to understand before agreeing with you is the rule of thumb equivalence formula between ICE and EV for braking, lat grip and direction changes (and traction too perhaps, but their advantage is obvious in that area courtesy of mass).
The skate board design helps lowering the CoG and the the PMOI while regen braking helps...braking.
But by how much does that offset excess weight? I have no idea and it would be good if someone told me, GT9 perhaps.
Are we looking at a 2,000kg EV performing more or less like a 1,500kg ICE in those areas? Or just like a 1,800kg one?
To answer Nick's question,I'd say that, generally speaking, the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective.The skate board design helps lowering the CoG and the the PMOI while regen braking helps...braking.
But by how much does that offset excess weight? I have no idea and it would be good if someone told me, GT9 perhaps.
Are we looking at a 2,000kg EV performing more or less like a 1,500kg ICE in those areas? Or just like a 1,800kg one?
. So a 1750kg EV with 250kg of battery (not sure if that is typical) will handle like a similar shape 1500kg ICE.That's really good to know as an equivalence adjuster and confirms that looking at the weight in isolation is flawed thinking. Where the weight is located, both in terms of CoG and PMOI, is equally relevant to understand the dynamics of an EV.
GT9 said:
Well...
Let's look at what you actually picked as an example.
The M5 CS has a power to weigh ratio at least 5% higher than the Taycan Turbo S.
The Porsche weighs in at 30% higher...
Nurburgring, BMW is 0.5% faster.
Shorter circuits the BMW is maybe 1.5% faster.
All of which does a lot more to disprove your point than prove it, wouldn't you say?
As for the point about an EV having so much mass near the corners, what does this mean?
Most of the mass is concentrated between the axles, compared to a front-engine ICE where there is a large concentration over the front axle.
The ability of this engine mass to impart side loads on the front tyres is far higher (per unit mass) than a battery that has a C of G midway between the axles, something like twice as much side load per unit mass...
It is also the case that during yaw the battery load is imparted at a vertical height close to the centreline of the axle, vs the engine which will impart its load well above the axle height, creating a higher rolling moment.
Then there is the effect of mass transfer under hard braking or acceleration, where again, the engine will makes itself known far more obviously (per unit mass) compared the skateboard battery.
All of which goes to explain why a 30% heavier car with a 5% lower power to weight ratio laps only 1-2% slower.
I get that we all want to stick up for the good old ICE, but I'm not sure what is achieved by saying that the 'skateboard design is dynamically terrible', because that's so far from the truth.
To answer Nick's question,I'd say that, generally speaking, the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective.
From an efficiency perspective, the extra mass is of course 'worth its weight in gold'.
Well, the M5 IS faster, so how does it disprove my point exactly? Also, the PS/t is not 5% better than on the Turbo S, you need to account for the fact that EVs have much smaller drivetrain losses (only about 3%) compared to ICEs (10-13%). Or we can even stay in the same stable and look at the Panamera Turbo S. That is the same size as the Taycan, costs the same, doesn't weigh much less, came out at around the same time, but it's also quite a bit faster with lower PS/t: https://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/5b4k66bcb6gmLet's look at what you actually picked as an example.
The M5 CS has a power to weigh ratio at least 5% higher than the Taycan Turbo S.
The Porsche weighs in at 30% higher...
Nurburgring, BMW is 0.5% faster.
Shorter circuits the BMW is maybe 1.5% faster.
All of which does a lot more to disprove your point than prove it, wouldn't you say?
As for the point about an EV having so much mass near the corners, what does this mean?
Most of the mass is concentrated between the axles, compared to a front-engine ICE where there is a large concentration over the front axle.
The ability of this engine mass to impart side loads on the front tyres is far higher (per unit mass) than a battery that has a C of G midway between the axles, something like twice as much side load per unit mass...
It is also the case that during yaw the battery load is imparted at a vertical height close to the centreline of the axle, vs the engine which will impart its load well above the axle height, creating a higher rolling moment.
Then there is the effect of mass transfer under hard braking or acceleration, where again, the engine will makes itself known far more obviously (per unit mass) compared the skateboard battery.
All of which goes to explain why a 30% heavier car with a 5% lower power to weight ratio laps only 1-2% slower.
I get that we all want to stick up for the good old ICE, but I'm not sure what is achieved by saying that the 'skateboard design is dynamically terrible', because that's so far from the truth.
To answer Nick's question,I'd say that, generally speaking, the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective.
From an efficiency perspective, the extra mass is of course 'worth its weight in gold'.
The front engine layout is, obviously, not dynamically ideal either, but still, I feel like you are twisting the facts quite a bit. Unless we are talking about Audis, the engines are not "over the front axle". They are mostly behind the front axle (or can be, the Panamera actually has the engine over
):
It's also not just the longitudinal position of the engine, but also it's lateral position, which is in the middle of the car, not extending right to the sides as with the skateboard. And as I've pointed out, it's not just the major masses that impart forces on the tires, it's the whole car. So even if the forces created by the battery were less, that gets balanced by the fact that the whole car is higher. What is also worth mentioning that although electric motors are relatively light compared to ICEs, they don't weight nothing (especially once you start getting into 1000s of PS) and have the disadvantage of always having to be placed right at the axles!
The skateboard design, without a question, is terrible. Ideally you would want the mass to be concentrated right below the CoG, but instead it's the EXACT OPPOSITE, with the mass being extended in all directions. Then, in addition, it raises the whole car, not just removing any CoG gain, but also making the car worse aerodynamically. How is that not terrible? EV or not, skateboard is terrible dynamically in every way and there are far better battery shape and placement methods!
So no, I wouldn't say that "the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective" at all. In fact, the skateboard architecture is probably worse even than front engine one (which is not good to begin with), even not accounting for weight.
aarondbs said:
Olibol said:
It does make me chuckle when people who drive DSG turbos talk about EVs lacking soul or driver involvement. I drove a DSG Mini Cooper S before buying out SE and in my opinion the electric one has loads more charisma and is faster to respond and generally a much better driver’s experience. Yes, I’d prefer to be driving something with a supercharger and a good manual gearbox, but that’s not the times we’re in.
Why? I have a V8 Auto 2 door, a D5 auto SUV, TD auto 4 door and a NA Petrol Manual 2 door on my drive. You can have what you want in the times you are in... no one needs to buy a electric sports styled car manufactured by AND in a state that murders its own people for having the wrong religion and beliefs, pays a pittance to hard working new and women and who are on a path of world domination. Isebac said:
Well, the M5 IS faster, so how does it disprove my point exactly? Also, the PS/t is not 5% better than on the Turbo S, you need to account for the fact that EVs have much smaller drivetrain losses (only about 3%) compared to ICEs (10-13%). Or we can even stay in the same stable and look at the Panamera Turbo S. That is the same size as the Taycan, costs the same, doesn't weigh much less, came out at around the same time, but it's also quite a bit faster with lower PS/t: https://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/5b4k66bcb6gm
The front engine layout is, obviously, not dynamically ideal either, but still, I feel like you are twisting the facts quite a bit. Unless we are talking about Audis, the engines are not "over the front axle". They are mostly behind the front axle (or can be, the Panamera actually has the engine over ):
It's also not just the longitudinal position of the engine, but also it's lateral position, which is in the middle of the car, not extending right to the sides as with the skateboard. And as I've pointed out, it's not just the major masses that impart forces on the tires, it's the whole car. So even if the forces created by the battery were less, that gets balanced by the fact that the whole car is higher. What is also worth mentioning that although electric motors are relatively light compared to ICEs, they don't weight nothing (especially once you start getting into 1000s of PS) and have the disadvantage of always having to be placed right at the axles!
The skateboard design, without a question, is terrible. Ideally you would want the mass to be concentrated right below the CoG, but instead it's the EXACT OPPOSITE, with the mass being extended in all directions. Then, in addition, it raises the whole car, not just removing any CoG gain, but also making the car worse aerodynamically. How is that not terrible? EV or not, skateboard is terrible dynamically in every way and there are far better battery shape and placement methods!
So no, I wouldn't say that "the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective" at all. In fact, the skateboard architecture is probably worse even than front engine one (which is not good to begin with), even not accounting for weight.
A Panamera is 1428mm high while a Taycan is 1412mm high.The front engine layout is, obviously, not dynamically ideal either, but still, I feel like you are twisting the facts quite a bit. Unless we are talking about Audis, the engines are not "over the front axle". They are mostly behind the front axle (or can be, the Panamera actually has the engine over
):It's also not just the longitudinal position of the engine, but also it's lateral position, which is in the middle of the car, not extending right to the sides as with the skateboard. And as I've pointed out, it's not just the major masses that impart forces on the tires, it's the whole car. So even if the forces created by the battery were less, that gets balanced by the fact that the whole car is higher. What is also worth mentioning that although electric motors are relatively light compared to ICEs, they don't weight nothing (especially once you start getting into 1000s of PS) and have the disadvantage of always having to be placed right at the axles!
The skateboard design, without a question, is terrible. Ideally you would want the mass to be concentrated right below the CoG, but instead it's the EXACT OPPOSITE, with the mass being extended in all directions. Then, in addition, it raises the whole car, not just removing any CoG gain, but also making the car worse aerodynamically. How is that not terrible? EV or not, skateboard is terrible dynamically in every way and there are far better battery shape and placement methods!
So no, I wouldn't say that "the extra mass that the battery adds is effectively entirely mitigated from a dynamic perspective" at all. In fact, the skateboard architecture is probably worse even than front engine one (which is not good to begin with), even not accounting for weight.
Why do you say that having a skateboard design makes the EV higher?
Also not needing large radiator grilles allows much better aerodynamics than an ICE vehicle
Edited by starsky67 on Thursday 20th April 14:04
starsky67 said:
A Panamera is 1428mm high while a Taycan is 1412mm high.
Why do you say that having a skateboard design makes the EV higher?
Well, you can change the height if you go for a more inclined driving position, but the principle should be pretty easy to understand. In a normal car you can put the seat right on the floor, in a skateboard EV, the seat can only be as low as the top of the battery, which is 100-200mm in thickness.Why do you say that having a skateboard design makes the EV higher?
Edited by starsky67 on Thursday 20th April 13:57
Isebac said:
Well, you can change the height if you go for a more inclined driving position, but the principle should be pretty easy to understand. In a normal car you can put the seat right on the floor, in a skateboard EV, the seat can only be as low as the top of the battery, which is 100-200mm in thickness.
Are you saying there is a CoG height deficit to EV overall, when including with driver/pax on board?Are there any non-skateboard solutions though where the seats are in a "recess" with no batteries? (I guess it will affect range of course and cost more?).
DonkeyApple said:
We spent the majority of the 21st century waging an illegal war in the Middle East that has killed thousands and displaced more. We stuck our beaks into Libya, Syria etc.
Meanwhile, at home, we just sit doing nothing while local warlords (waging war on carbon atoms so as to get on TV and be important) bring Wales and Scotland to their knees.
The problem with China is not that it's an awesome country but that millions in the West who have spent everything they can earn and borrow to finance the growth of China have suddenly decided what they've done has been very silly but that it must be someone else's fault and the best place to start looking for someone to blame is overseas, preferably non white.
It's the same silliness as the cobalt idiocy. People who have demanded and consumed cobalt all their life and who have been part of the exploitation of child labour are suddenly reprogrammed to bang on about cobalt because they don't like EVs, despite the reality being that it has been the emergence of the EV that brought to light what they've been doing all their lives with their unfettered shopping.
There are too many people today who live their life based on WWDD and it does make the discussion cloudy.
Can't disagree with any of that. Meanwhile, at home, we just sit doing nothing while local warlords (waging war on carbon atoms so as to get on TV and be important) bring Wales and Scotland to their knees.
The problem with China is not that it's an awesome country but that millions in the West who have spent everything they can earn and borrow to finance the growth of China have suddenly decided what they've done has been very silly but that it must be someone else's fault and the best place to start looking for someone to blame is overseas, preferably non white.
It's the same silliness as the cobalt idiocy. People who have demanded and consumed cobalt all their life and who have been part of the exploitation of child labour are suddenly reprogrammed to bang on about cobalt because they don't like EVs, despite the reality being that it has been the emergence of the EV that brought to light what they've been doing all their lives with their unfettered shopping.
There are too many people today who live their life based on WWDD and it does make the discussion cloudy.
nickfrog said:
Are you saying there is a CoG height deficit to EV overall, when including with driver/pax on board?
Are there any non-skateboard solutions though where the seats are in a "recess" with no batteries? (I guess it will affect range of course and cost more?).
From what I heard from engineers, the CoG is "about the same".Are there any non-skateboard solutions though where the seats are in a "recess" with no batteries? (I guess it will affect range of course and cost more?).
Yes, there are. As I already mentioned, the Rimac Nevera, for example, puts the batteries in a T shape, with part of it being in the "transmission tunnel" and part of it behind the seats. That gives you much lower polar moment of inertial and lets you get lower CoG as well.
DonkeyApple said:
We spent the majority of the 21st century waging an illegal war in the Middle East that has killed thousands and displaced more. We stuck our beaks into Libya, Syria etc.
Meanwhile, at home, we just sit doing nothing while local warlords (waging war on carbon atoms so as to get on TV and be important) bring Wales and Scotland to their knees.
The problem with China is not that it's an awesome country but that millions in the West who have spent everything they can earn and borrow to finance the growth of China have suddenly decided what they've done has been very silly but that it must be someone else's fault and the best place to start looking for someone to blame is overseas, preferably non white.
It's the same silliness as the cobalt idiocy. People who have demanded and consumed cobalt all their life and who have been part of the exploitation of child labour are suddenly reprogrammed to bang on about cobalt because they don't like EVs, despite the reality being that it has been the emergence of the EV that brought to light what they've been doing all their lives with their unfettered shopping.
There are too many people today who live their life based on WWDD and it does make the discussion cloudy.
Nailed it.Meanwhile, at home, we just sit doing nothing while local warlords (waging war on carbon atoms so as to get on TV and be important) bring Wales and Scotland to their knees.
The problem with China is not that it's an awesome country but that millions in the West who have spent everything they can earn and borrow to finance the growth of China have suddenly decided what they've done has been very silly but that it must be someone else's fault and the best place to start looking for someone to blame is overseas, preferably non white.
It's the same silliness as the cobalt idiocy. People who have demanded and consumed cobalt all their life and who have been part of the exploitation of child labour are suddenly reprogrammed to bang on about cobalt because they don't like EVs, despite the reality being that it has been the emergence of the EV that brought to light what they've been doing all their lives with their unfettered shopping.
There are too many people today who live their life based on WWDD and it does make the discussion cloudy.
Isebac said:
starsky67 said:
A Panamera is 1428mm high while a Taycan is 1412mm high.
Why do you say that having a skateboard design makes the EV higher?
Well, you can change the height if you go for a more inclined driving position, but the principle should be pretty easy to understand. In a normal car you can put the seat right on the floor, in a skateboard EV, the seat can only be as low as the top of the battery, which is 100-200mm in thickness.Why do you say that having a skateboard design makes the EV higher?
Edited by starsky67 on Thursday 20th April 13:57
Isebac said:
From what I heard from engineers, the CoG is "about the same".
Yes, there are. As I already mentioned, the Rimac Nevera, for example, puts the batteries in a T shape, with part of it being in the "transmission tunnel" and part of it behind the seats. That gives you much lower polar moment of inertial and lets you get lower CoG as well.
How and earth you are still arguing that a 500+ kg mass penalty for the Taycan Turbo S resulting in just a 3 second Nurburgring penalty over the M5 CS somehow proves that the skateboard chassis is inferior?Yes, there are. As I already mentioned, the Rimac Nevera, for example, puts the batteries in a T shape, with part of it being in the "transmission tunnel" and part of it behind the seats. That gives you much lower polar moment of inertial and lets you get lower CoG as well.
And what do the designers of ICE-engined cars do when they want ultimate handling characteristics?
That's right, they move the engine to the middle of the car, essentially what every skateboard EV is giving you for free.
What you really should be doing is compare a 'mid-engined' EV (Nevara etc.) with a mid-engined ICE car and a skateboard EV with a front-engined car, not mid-engine EV with skateboard EV. Right now you are just cherry-picking whatever you can find to confirm your bias rather than taking a first principles approach.
I can only assume that you must be Comical Ali looking for a later life career move if you continue to claim that a skateboard chassis moves mass to the extremities, anybody with eye can see that it's concentrated low down and in the middle of the car.
Edited by GT9 on Thursday 20th April 16:02
carlo996 said:
simonrockman said:
In the main I'd agree but the Honda-E has soul.
Can you explain a bit more? There were comments here on MG4 sales, I saw one in Police livery this week, in Westminster, which I think was an interesting decision by the Met.
Like many here I struggled with the two MX-5s weight of the MG until I heard the specs of the Wiesmann Thunderball. That's also a small two seat convertible and despite using lots of carbon fibre it's close to two tonnes. Perhaps it is what it is.
In general, we need to be more nuanced in our views on electric cars.
Olibol said:
It does make me chuckle when people who drive DSG turbos talk about EVs lacking soul or driver involvement. I drove a DSG Mini Cooper S before buying out SE and in my opinion the electric one has loads more charisma and is faster to respond and generally a much better driver’s experience. Yes, I’d prefer to be driving something with a supercharger and a good manual gearbox, but that’s not the times we’re in.
Right, so you're saying your EV (you don't say what it is - what's an 'SE'?) wipes away any Golf R, Renaultsport Megane, A45 AMG, Porsche Boxster, Alpine A110 in 'soul', 'charisma' and 'driver involvement'?I'm happy you enjoy your EV my man...... but I think I'll stay in my world for another while yet.
Arsecati said:
Olibol said:
It does make me chuckle when people who drive DSG turbos talk about EVs lacking soul or driver involvement. I drove a DSG Mini Cooper S before buying out SE and in my opinion the electric one has loads more charisma and is faster to respond and generally a much better driver’s experience. Yes, I’d prefer to be driving something with a supercharger and a good manual gearbox, but that’s not the times we’re in.
Right, so you're saying your EV (you don't say what it is - what's an 'SE'?) wipes away any Golf R, Renaultsport Megane, A45 AMG, Porsche Boxster, Alpine A110 in 'soul', 'charisma' and 'driver involvement'?I'm happy you enjoy your EV my man...... but I think I'll stay in my world for another while yet.
Olibol said:
Arsecati said:
Olibol said:
It does make me chuckle when people who drive DSG turbos talk about EVs lacking soul or driver involvement. I drove a DSG Mini Cooper S before buying out SE and in my opinion the electric one has loads more charisma and is faster to respond and generally a much better driver’s experience. Yes, I’d prefer to be driving something with a supercharger and a good manual gearbox, but that’s not the times we’re in.
Right, so you're saying your EV (you don't say what it is - what's an 'SE'?) wipes away any Golf R, Renaultsport Megane, A45 AMG, Porsche Boxster, Alpine A110 in 'soul', 'charisma' and 'driver involvement'?I'm happy you enjoy your EV my man...... but I think I'll stay in my world for another while yet.
Otherwise, for sheer visceral enjoyment it has to be either a good manual or even better a sequential with straight cut gears, now you're talking about feedback!
carlo996 said:
danp said:
And the rest! More like 1750kg, the GT-R was famously nice and heavy so that it was easy to drive for mere mortals.
https://www.topgear.com/car-news/top-gear-magazine...
A model 3 is over 2000kg. It’s funny, the GTR is picked as it’s a notoriously heavy car. How about an Exige https://www.topgear.com/car-news/top-gear-magazine...
Model 3 is 1726kg.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff