Differences between EV drivetrains?
Discussion
If I decide to buy a conventional ICE car for a set amount of money, say 40K for the sake of argument, I'll have a wide variety of options available based on body styles and drivetrains. So an SUV with either a manual or automatic gearbox, diesel or petrol with varying capacities.
When it comes to EV vehicles there can be the same range of body styles, but are there significant difference in the drivetrains between EV cars? Do batteries and electric motors vary much between manufactures?
When it comes to EV vehicles there can be the same range of body styles, but are there significant difference in the drivetrains between EV cars? Do batteries and electric motors vary much between manufactures?
I understand there are different types of motor and some lean towards torque and others towards economy.
https://circuitdigest.com/article/different-types-...
https://circuitdigest.com/article/different-types-...
This is noticeably becoming a thing of late, however it's a bit more complex and the usual low economy = powah.
I *think* the Hyundai Ioniq has the most efficient motor, closly followed by Tesla (the 3 and Raven S).
Ipace seems to have the least economical.
Tesla and Porsche seem to have the most powerful.
Gearboxes, you won't find a manual.
I *think* the Hyundai Ioniq has the most efficient motor, closly followed by Tesla (the 3 and Raven S).
Ipace seems to have the least economical.
Tesla and Porsche seem to have the most powerful.
Gearboxes, you won't find a manual.
an interesting look at batteries and motors from tesla bmw and chevy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgu6mkKZwNg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgu6mkKZwNg
donkmeister said:
jjwilde said:
Gearboxes, you won't find a manual.
Tesla Roadster...(I didn't say it was particularly useful or successful
)One of the Honda or Toyota hybrids was available with a manual, I saw one on a used car forecourt and was surprised by the manual gearknob.
Really there is no significant difference between traction motors in an production EV!
Unlike an ICE, where things like performance, efficiency and most of all NVH can be very dependant upon the design and development effort expended by the manufacturer, all eMachines are very efficient! A terrible one is around 94% efficient, and a brilliant one around 97% efficient on average, ie, that difference alone is only worth 3 miles out of 100!!
What really matters is two things:
1) The optimisation of the vehicle, ie the reduction in roadload, rather than the efficiency of the powertrain in delivering that roadload. Build a car with a 10% lower average drag, and well, that's 10% extra range! The BMW i3 is the low speed winner here (light weight, low rolling resistance) and so far, the Hyundai's seem good at high / medium speeds (better aero than the i3). The more "performance oriented" the vehicle, the worse the consumption is likely to be, with things like wide tyres and suspension geo optimised for handling/latG all requiring more power to move along.
2) How well the system apportions it's various loads across the widest user spectrum. The traction motor is just one, and things like cabin conditioning, battery conditioning, low voltage system charging etc all use a significant amount of power, at low speeds, about the same as it takes to move the car around!
Bigger gains are there to be had from higher system voltages (ie 800V like the Taycan) and when EV start to use multispeed transmissions (like the Taycan....)
Unlike an ICE, where things like performance, efficiency and most of all NVH can be very dependant upon the design and development effort expended by the manufacturer, all eMachines are very efficient! A terrible one is around 94% efficient, and a brilliant one around 97% efficient on average, ie, that difference alone is only worth 3 miles out of 100!!
What really matters is two things:
1) The optimisation of the vehicle, ie the reduction in roadload, rather than the efficiency of the powertrain in delivering that roadload. Build a car with a 10% lower average drag, and well, that's 10% extra range! The BMW i3 is the low speed winner here (light weight, low rolling resistance) and so far, the Hyundai's seem good at high / medium speeds (better aero than the i3). The more "performance oriented" the vehicle, the worse the consumption is likely to be, with things like wide tyres and suspension geo optimised for handling/latG all requiring more power to move along.
2) How well the system apportions it's various loads across the widest user spectrum. The traction motor is just one, and things like cabin conditioning, battery conditioning, low voltage system charging etc all use a significant amount of power, at low speeds, about the same as it takes to move the car around!
Bigger gains are there to be had from higher system voltages (ie 800V like the Taycan) and when EV start to use multispeed transmissions (like the Taycan....)
jjwilde said:
This is noticeably becoming a thing of late, however it's a bit more complex and the usual low economy = powah.
I *think* the Hyundai Ioniq has the most efficient motor, closly followed by Tesla (the 3 and Raven S).
Ipace seems to have the least economical.
Tesla and Porsche seem to have the most powerful.
Gearboxes, you won't find a manual.
The Ipace motor is 96-97% efficient much as all the other motors out there. I *think* the Hyundai Ioniq has the most efficient motor, closly followed by Tesla (the 3 and Raven S).
Ipace seems to have the least economical.
Tesla and Porsche seem to have the most powerful.
Gearboxes, you won't find a manual.
What causes inefficiencies on at least the ipace appears to be
1) the higher Coefficient of Drag (tesla S/X 0.24 , ioniq 0.24 - Ipace 0.29 etron and eqc are also high Cd (0,28) )
2) moving the 2.2+ Ton weight (same/more than a Model S) the ioniq is a featherweight @ <1500KG)
3) The large frontal area of the SUV form factor.
4) the apparent aggressive way the IPace appears to be managing it's batteries and motor cooling adding a higher parasitic load on top of propulsion.
The drag and cooling load gets worse for the IPace faster the car is moving.
There are formula here if you want to see factors in what causes higher power consumption.
One of the significant reasons for the Jag's higher CD apparently is the patterned grille (compared to most other EV's e.g ioniq/tesla) - that and it's SUV size (giving a larger frontal Area) - as with etron and EQC.
Jaguar seem to have been incredibly conservative with anything to do with the batteries from limiting charging rates to going strong on cooling, Tesla have a number of years of experience in their BMS - and have taken a more aggressive stance (though as we know they have had to drop capacities on certain cars due to usage patterns affecting the battery health recently), two different approaches to EV power management..
If Jag were to work on their Cd and reshape the car more range could be there for the taking- however the car looks lovely and has a Jaguar "brand" feel to the car as it is and improving the Cd (e.g. smoothing out the grille) would/could affect that - it's a trade off between brand styling and range - Mercedes and Audi have done the same, Tesla starting as an EV company always used a high flow styling.
As far as the BMS goes - There are rumours of a telematics/BMS update giving a little more range in the works.
51mes said:
The Ipace motor is 96-97% efficient much as all the other motors out there.
What causes inefficiencies on at least the ipace appears to be
1) the higher Coefficient of Drag (tesla S/X 0.24 , ioniq 0.24 - Ipace 0.29 etron and eqc are also high Cd (0,28) )
2) moving the 2.2+ Ton weight (same/more than a Model S) the ioniq is a featherweight @ <1500KG)
3) The large frontal area of the SUV form factor.
4) the apparent aggressive way the IPace appears to be managing it's batteries and motor cooling adding a higher parasitic load on top of propulsion.
The drag and cooling load gets worse for the IPace faster the car is moving.
There are formula here if you want to see factors in what causes higher power consumption.
One of the significant reasons for the Jag's higher CD apparently is the patterned grille (compared to most other EV's e.g ioniq/tesla) - that and it's SUV size (giving a larger frontal Area) - as with etron and EQC.
Jaguar seem to have been incredibly conservative with anything to do with the batteries from limiting charging rates to going strong on cooling, Tesla have a number of years of experience in their BMS - and have taken a more aggressive stance (though as we know they have had to drop capacities on certain cars due to usage patterns affecting the battery health recently), two different approaches to EV power management..
If Jag were to work on their Cd and reshape the car more range could be there for the taking- however the car looks lovely and has a Jaguar "brand" feel to the car as it is and improving the Cd (e.g. smoothing out the grille) would/could affect that - it's a trade off between brand styling and range - Mercedes and Audi have done the same, Tesla starting as an EV company always used a high flow styling.
As far as the BMS goes - There are rumours of a telematics/BMS update giving a little more range in the works.
Interesting point 4. My Leaf has no active cooling as I understand it and doesn't appear to need it. The indicated temperature almost never varies with use only ambient and then is almost always 5 bars in summer and 4 in winter. It was 6 years before I saw it less than 4 when we had the beast from the east when I did see 2. Occasionally 6 during heat waves. Never seen 7.What causes inefficiencies on at least the ipace appears to be
1) the higher Coefficient of Drag (tesla S/X 0.24 , ioniq 0.24 - Ipace 0.29 etron and eqc are also high Cd (0,28) )
2) moving the 2.2+ Ton weight (same/more than a Model S) the ioniq is a featherweight @ <1500KG)
3) The large frontal area of the SUV form factor.
4) the apparent aggressive way the IPace appears to be managing it's batteries and motor cooling adding a higher parasitic load on top of propulsion.
The drag and cooling load gets worse for the IPace faster the car is moving.
There are formula here if you want to see factors in what causes higher power consumption.
One of the significant reasons for the Jag's higher CD apparently is the patterned grille (compared to most other EV's e.g ioniq/tesla) - that and it's SUV size (giving a larger frontal Area) - as with etron and EQC.
Jaguar seem to have been incredibly conservative with anything to do with the batteries from limiting charging rates to going strong on cooling, Tesla have a number of years of experience in their BMS - and have taken a more aggressive stance (though as we know they have had to drop capacities on certain cars due to usage patterns affecting the battery health recently), two different approaches to EV power management..
If Jag were to work on their Cd and reshape the car more range could be there for the taking- however the car looks lovely and has a Jaguar "brand" feel to the car as it is and improving the Cd (e.g. smoothing out the grille) would/could affect that - it's a trade off between brand styling and range - Mercedes and Audi have done the same, Tesla starting as an EV company always used a high flow styling.
As far as the BMS goes - There are rumours of a telematics/BMS update giving a little more range in the works.
For the British climate heating during cold overnight charging could conceivably be useful but never heating it’s self or cooling.
granada203028 said:
My Leaf has no active cooling as I understand it and doesn't appear to need it.
It entirely depends on your usage.If you are a Leaf owner I assume you are familiar with RapidGate? Even the latest Leaf suffers badly, just look at YouTube for Bjorn Nyland's 1000km test, it doesn't take much for the passive cooling to become overwhelmed and massively throttle charging speeds.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff