3 ms·

It will be interesting to see how the numbers shake out. I've just known too many drivers that can't even keep a constant throttle, so making throttle response

It will be interesting to see how the numbers shake out. I've just known too many drivers that can't even keep a constant throttle, so making throttle response instantaneous is problematic. Analogy: my kid has an electric dirt bike, and it has a knob to control throttle response, and a knob to control speed. He can rock top speed, but he still can't handle more than 1/3rd up the dial on throttle response. He doesn't have good enough throttle control to handle the torque, and this is a tiny little thing. I base much of my thoughts off the experience of working with him to learn throttle control (he accidentally power slides in turns all the time, which is iffy on a dirtbike for a kid), and my experience with other drivers.

sliken 5y ago
I came from a Forester Turbo XT, it's a lesson on non-linearity. Each RPM speed has range of power that depends on how spun up the turbo speed. So RPM X might be 100HP without turbo, to 150HP once the exhaust pressure results in higher turbo speed, which results in more air in the engine, which results in a more turbo speed. Took a fair bit of experience to get used to it. It was quite fun to drive though. I found switching to an EV dramatically easier to drive, despite having about twice the performance. Nearly every driver on the planet handles nearly 1G braking on nearly every car on the planet from the last decade, even the outliers like the cars with drum brakes. The improved modern brake caused no rash of problems with over braking, no huge spike in crashes, no calls for strong laws to control braking speeds. Why should accelerating at nearly 1G be any different than braking at 1G? The key to safe driving is predictable performance, giving drivers what they expect.