How far can EV power outputs go ?
Discussion
Was pondering EV power outputs , we have the Tesla Plaid with over 1000 bhp, the Lucid Air with 1100 and the supercar stuff like the Rimac and Lotus Evija with knocking on 2000 bhp. Massive power outputs are making us a bit blase and EV's with 300 bhp seem a bit like they are not trying.
How far can it go ?
What are the limiting factors beyond not needing it, it being a bad idea in a lot of cases giving punters a 1000 bhp. Is it technically far easier than in an ICE ?
Will legislation creep in to limit power ? Back int he day, the Lotus Carlton caused uproar with 375 bhp, Tesla Plaid appears, not a murmur.
Will Chinese manufacturers come in with cheaper models with loads of power ? Not necessarily more than than the Plaid, but still big numbers for not much money, is a 30 grand 700 bhp plausible ?
How far can it go ?
What are the limiting factors beyond not needing it, it being a bad idea in a lot of cases giving punters a 1000 bhp. Is it technically far easier than in an ICE ?
Will legislation creep in to limit power ? Back int he day, the Lotus Carlton caused uproar with 375 bhp, Tesla Plaid appears, not a murmur.
Will Chinese manufacturers come in with cheaper models with loads of power ? Not necessarily more than than the Plaid, but still big numbers for not much money, is a 30 grand 700 bhp plausible ?
NDA said:
I suspect tyre technology is going to be a limiting factor - once you're getting under 2 second 0-60 times, tyres need to be very special.
Another factor might be the 'who actually needs it?' factor.
Yep. We're already at the limit IMHO. Another factor might be the 'who actually needs it?' factor.
Look at the new i4 M50. AWD, 544bhp, still struggling for traction with 285 section rear tyres that ruin the efficiency if you option them.
The big question for me is how small/light can batteries get? That's going to be the thing that changes the picture for EV's and will really affect everything (performance, ride, handling, braking, efficiency, packaging).
The horsepower doesn't even tell the whole story - the torque and traction are quite alien to 'most' ICE drivers too.
I think 2000hp seems to be about the practical limit in terms of tyre performance and also I imagine weight of motors, inverter, cooling complexity etc. The returns for pushing even more power must start to diminish pretty quickly.
For the average sporty EV, I can't see much argument for excess of 600 ish hp personally. Nice to have more, if only fleatingly as a 'boost' mode or whatever - but hardly required to go very quickly and have a lot of fun. I do sometimes question the fact that people with no real interest in performance cars or driving are now buying EV's because they're on trend - but also happen to have several hundred more horsepower than their old car had. A lot of those buyers will have no previous experience if anything like as powerful - suspect a few will come a cropper as a result!
I think 2000hp seems to be about the practical limit in terms of tyre performance and also I imagine weight of motors, inverter, cooling complexity etc. The returns for pushing even more power must start to diminish pretty quickly.
For the average sporty EV, I can't see much argument for excess of 600 ish hp personally. Nice to have more, if only fleatingly as a 'boost' mode or whatever - but hardly required to go very quickly and have a lot of fun. I do sometimes question the fact that people with no real interest in performance cars or driving are now buying EV's because they're on trend - but also happen to have several hundred more horsepower than their old car had. A lot of those buyers will have no previous experience if anything like as powerful - suspect a few will come a cropper as a result!
I think the engineering limit for now it the rate at which the batteries can be discharged, which means that the power you can have is effectively proportional to the size of the battery. If there's a significant change in battery chemistry which improves the power to weight/size ratio of the batteries power could, in theory, be far higher but there wouldn't really be much point.
I think we'll see power to weight ratios settle at roughly what they are for ICE vehicles, with something around the 100bhp/tonne mark being the norm for mainstream family cars, up through about 200 for "sporty" mainstream cars, with high end performance cars maybe pushing 3-400bhp/tonne. Supercars... I don't really know or care.
I think we'll see power to weight ratios settle at roughly what they are for ICE vehicles, with something around the 100bhp/tonne mark being the norm for mainstream family cars, up through about 200 for "sporty" mainstream cars, with high end performance cars maybe pushing 3-400bhp/tonne. Supercars... I don't really know or care.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 18:40
kambites said:
I think the engineering limit for now it the rate at which the batteries can be discharged, which means that the power you can have is effectively proportional to the size of the battery. If there's a significant change in battery chemistry which improves the power to weight/size ratio of the batteries power could, in theory, be far higher but there wouldn't really be much point.
I think we'll see power to weight ratios settle at roughly what they are for ICE vehicles, with something around the 100bhp/tonne mark being the norm for mainstream family cars, up through about 200 for "sporty" mainstream cars, with high end performance cars maybe pushing 3-400bhp/tonne. Supercars... I don't really know or care.
I would say that quite a few non-sporty EV family cars/hatches etc are well above the 100bhp/tonne level, and most equivalent ICE cars are still probably below that point - for non sporty models that is.I think we'll see power to weight ratios settle at roughly what they are for ICE vehicles, with something around the 100bhp/tonne mark being the norm for mainstream family cars, up through about 200 for "sporty" mainstream cars, with high end performance cars maybe pushing 3-400bhp/tonne. Supercars... I don't really know or care.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 18:40
Thing is, giving an EV 400hp instead of 200hp doesn't really have a significant cost or economy impact, unlike it would with ICE. But it does probably make the car more attractive to more buyers because the power is fun
TheDeuce said:
I would say that quite a few non-sporty EV family cars/hatches etc are well above the 100bhp/tonne level, and most equivalent ICE cars are still probably below that point - for non sporty models that is.
Are there? The likes of the Corsa-E, Peugeot e208, Zoe, Leaf, ID3, MG5, etc. all seem to be somewhere around that sort of level; as are the entry level versions of the various SUVs from established manufacturers from what I've seen. As you say, you can buy ICE vehicles in those classes with less, but usually not with much less now everything has gone turbocharged.
ETA: I think the idea that more power makes a car more attractive to mainstream buyers simply isn't true. I think many, possibly even most, would view more power as a negative once past a certain point. And I suspect that point would be considered very low by many PHers.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 18:58
I suspect the other factor here is not only the outputs, but how accessible that output is. Times gone by you'd need a bit of skill to achieve near factory quoted 0-60 times, my hunch is that it's now much easier for your average driver to do that with an EV. Makes even the more average EV seem faster than it really is.
'100bhp / ton' can mean different things between that figure in the ICE and the EV vehicle.
in an ICE car which is designed for road use the engine power usually rises with rpm till some point at which it starts to drop, thus the figure quoted (100hp/ton) refers to the the peak power to weight and across most of the rpm band is substantially less than this.
in the EV case the torque of the motor can be 'tuned' to be greater at lower rpm and reduce as rpm rises which can thus provide 100hp / ton all the time.
a 100hp/ton EV would leave a 100hp/ton ICE car for dead.
in an ICE car which is designed for road use the engine power usually rises with rpm till some point at which it starts to drop, thus the figure quoted (100hp/ton) refers to the the peak power to weight and across most of the rpm band is substantially less than this.
in the EV case the torque of the motor can be 'tuned' to be greater at lower rpm and reduce as rpm rises which can thus provide 100hp / ton all the time.
a 100hp/ton EV would leave a 100hp/ton ICE car for dead.
If the limiting factor is the ability of the tyres to provide the traction and we presume that tyre technology advancement overcomes this to greater and greater degrees, then at what point would the road surface become the limiting factor?
In the future I believe legislation will play a big part, at least until cars become self driving with no option to manually override. Don't know about anyone else but that would depress me.
In the future I believe legislation will play a big part, at least until cars become self driving with no option to manually override. Don't know about anyone else but that would depress me.
My "sporty" EV has 190 horses, weighs a little under 1,200kg and has 175 section tyres. It is imo, a perfect match :-)
Now we have traction system voltages up to around 900 volts, and battery discharge rates at around 20C, we are really at the practical limit for power. And as mentioned, we now have EVs where the tyre is limiting up to around 100 mph, even with 4wd!
Now we have traction system voltages up to around 900 volts, and battery discharge rates at around 20C, we are really at the practical limit for power. And as mentioned, we now have EVs where the tyre is limiting up to around 100 mph, even with 4wd!
Tye Green said:
a 100hp/ton EV would leave a 100hp/ton ICE car for dead.
"Leave for dead" is a bit extreme, but yes generally like-for-like power to weight ratios an EV will be somewhat faster. I think the bigger difference is in responsiveness and refinement rather than outright performance though; it's generally far easier and less dramatic to extract the performance from an EV. However you measure it, for most buyers of white-goods type cars I think once 0-60 times get below something like seven or eight seconds, extra performance becomes a negative rather than a positive because of its impact on things like insurance premiums. Especially if that 7-8 seconds is as accessible as it tends to be in EVs.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 19:24
kambites said:
"Leave for dead" is a bit extreme, but yes generally like-for-like power to weight ratios an EV will be somewhat faster. I think the bigger difference is in responsiveness and refinement rather than outright performance though; it's generally far easier and less dramatic to extract the performance from an EV.
However you measure it, for most buyers of white-goods type cars I think once 0-60 times get below something like seven or eight seconds, extra performance becomes a negative rather than a positive because of its impact on things like insurance premiums. Especially if that 7-8 seconds is as accessible as it tends to be in EVs.
Not only that but they're probably not used to it. You'll see comments like 'the traction control is always coming on' and 'it's spinning wheels everywhere' because they're just mashing the throttle like they used to in their Ice vehicles. You've got people not used to arriving at corners a fair few mph faster than they have previously too. However you measure it, for most buyers of white-goods type cars I think once 0-60 times get below something like seven or eight seconds, extra performance becomes a negative rather than a positive because of its impact on things like insurance premiums. Especially if that 7-8 seconds is as accessible as it tends to be in EVs.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 19:24
It's at the point manufacturer’s would probably have to spend more in terms of chassis and suspension than they probably would like at that sort of price range.
kambites said:
Tye Green said:
a 100hp/ton EV would leave a 100hp/ton ICE car for dead.
"Leave for dead" is a bit extreme, but yes generally like-for-like power to weight ratios an EV will be somewhat faster. I think the bigger difference is in responsiveness and refinement rather than outright performance though; it's generally far easier and less dramatic to extract the performance from an EV. However you measure it, for most buyers of white-goods type cars I think once 0-60 times get below something like seven or eight seconds, extra performance becomes a negative rather than a positive because of its impact on things like insurance premiums. Especially if that 7-8 seconds is as accessible as it tends to be in EVs.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 19:24
Donbot said:
I doubt anything happens until the poors start driving them.
Joking aside, the case involving the Tesla driver on autopilot that killed someone covered part of this. Ok, so this is the litigious US, so massive pinch of salt, but there are parallel counter claims that the driver involved should have never had a 'powerful car' and because they were a bad driver, they shouldnt have been allowed to buy and drive it.Wont be long until we see cases where you get cheap EV's outrunning the Explorer cop cars (most have the 3.7 non-turbo engine!) or causing massive crashes in chases / bad driving situations. Its a slippery slope and it wont be long until law enforcement are asking for remote disabling of EV's and various 'think of the children' organizations are calling for speed limiters and reduced power for these 'death traps on wheels'..... you can just imagine the headlines!
Been here before of course and nothing changes. What happened to personal accountability? "I didnt know it was that fast!", yeah right Chad. See you in court and dont forget to take the soap.
kambites said:
TheDeuce said:
I would say that quite a few non-sporty EV family cars/hatches etc are well above the 100bhp/tonne level, and most equivalent ICE cars are still probably below that point - for non sporty models that is.
Are there? The likes of the Corsa-E, Peugeot e208, Zoe, Leaf, ID3, MG5, etc. all seem to be somewhere around that sort of level; as are the entry level versions of the various SUVs from established manufacturers from what I've seen. As you say, you can buy ICE vehicles in those classes with less, but usually not with much less now everything has gone turbocharged.
ETA: I think the idea that more power makes a car more attractive to mainstream buyers simply isn't true. I think many, possibly even most, would view more power as a negative once past a certain point. And I suspect that point would be considered very low by many PHers.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 25th January 18:58
Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
TheDeuce said:
Fair enough at the budget end of the family car sector - but what about the more upmarket stuff?
Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
But what makes you think those people would want 300bhp let alone 500? I know it's hard for a driving enthusiast to understand, but I think most (obviously not all) of them would genuinely prefer to have less power. Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
kambites said:
TheDeuce said:
Fair enough at the budget end of the family car sector - but what about the more upmarket stuff?
Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
But what makes you think those people would want 300bhp let alone 500? I know it's hard for a driving enthusiast to understand, but I think most (obviously not all) of them would genuinely prefer to have less power. Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
Plenty of lower powered versions around as well, the Q4 etron starts at 170bhp in 35 spec for example. The larger etron starts at 300bhp in 50 spec which in a 2500KG+ car is far from overpowered. The ix3 has 270bhp, the X3 2.0d 190bhp so not exactly a rocket ship in comparison.
TheDeuce said:
Fair enough at the budget end of the family car sector - but what about the more upmarket stuff?
Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
I think you are being a little harsh on the brand thing. Yes, there are people who will buy a particular brand because of badge snobbery, but I would also argue that there are a lot of people who rate perceived quality, equipment, personalization as well as appearance - and performance is lower in the list. If you live in a major city, getting up to speed quickly is important but not critical. The 0-40 figure tends to be useful while 60-100 really doesnt do anything. So yeah, buyers de-prioritize performance because that top of the line X3 2.0d is sufficient for what they need. I get it, and thats perfectly fine for a lot of people.Compare the sort of lower powered BMW X3's and X5's that people buy because they like the look and the brand, they don't care the car is underpowered, they're not a passionate driver, they just want a car that is fashionable and makes them feel good.
Those same people moving to the electric equivalents are all straight in to the 300-500hp club, and probably double the torque they're used too.
Same for most of the 'not so cheap' brands EV's.
There are others for whom they have a budget and a price point, and they want the best they can afford. Usually that means perceived lower brands and again, thats absolutely fine. Their money, their choice and I wont argue with that. When one of the most popular cars here in the US is the Rav4 and thats a 2.4 i4 with just over 200BHP - an engine that wont get your heart beating - it says a lot. Couple that with a CVT gearbox, it says a lot. Does the average buyer 'need' a 460BHP EV SUV? For some, absolutely, for others? Maybe not so much.
I use the example of the Rav4 for a reason though - its a very popular size and format and a very average base engine. I keep seeing complaints about EV's that only have 200BHP (ID4 for example). Not enough power everyone screams. Not fast enough are the comments. In reality, seamless and swift acceleration with minimal noise and a 0-60 time of 8.5 seconds - the Rav4 is 9.1 for reference. I am sure for a lot of buyers, the ID4 seems 'nicer'....
Now, I am not suggesting for a minute that I wouldnt be tempted by at least 500BHP, but I am also a realist. Not everyone wants that, which is fine. Though you do make a point - jumping from a 200BHP Rav4 into a 360BHP Tesla Model Y is always going to feel very different, though its at a big price differential. Average sales prices for new cars in the US has steadily risen over the last few years and doesnt seem to be stalling. 80 month loan terms, low interest rates and preferential leasing (with mileage checks at the end of the term) mean more and more people are getting into cars that they probably shouldnt have.
But hey, if you can afford it, why not? I just think that the market is reflecting the demand (and creating demand too), but this isnt at the low end of the market - yet.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff