4 ms·

It drops a buck fifty per motor. That IS a game changer. It can make cars cheaper, or longer range, or faster, or any number of other designs based on what the

It drops a buck fifty per motor. That IS a game changer. It can make cars cheaper, or longer range, or faster, or any number of other designs based on what the manufacturer is looking for. But to OP's point about flight - stacking 6 Tesla motors is not an option. Stacking 6 of these YASA motors? Much less weight.

Aurornis 1y ago
> It drops a buck fifty per motor. That IS a game changer. You’re reading their marketing material. You have to think of this like all of those PR releases you’ve seen over the years about new battery technology that is 4X smaller or new hard drive tech that is 10X more efficient. The real world improvements aren’t going to be as big as their one lab test. A Model 3 motor is already well under 150lbs, unless you start including ancillaries like the inverter and power transmission parts. They’re not dropping “a buck fifty” from typical EV motors.
- catapart 1y ago
  I'm not reading anyone's marketing material. If you want to dispute the shipping weight, feel free to correct this website whom I assume charges for shipping based on weight [0]. I'm sure they'd love to know they have it wrong. According to purchasable equipment, the Model 3 engines weight ~175 lbs. If that's wrong, that's on them for claiming it. Subtract 28 lbs from that and you're at 147 lbs. That is very close to 150 lbs. [0] https://evshop.eu/en/electric-motors/295-tesla-model-3-drive-unit-with-controller.html https://evshop.eu/en/electric-motors/295-tesla-model-3-drive...
  - Aurornis 1y ago
    That’s a drive unit, which is more than the motor. Read the description: > This kit includes the Tesla motor, inverter, gear box, power cables and drive shafts. Drive shafts, gearbox, power cables, inverter. Also includes the mounts, which is likely not factored into the lab calculations for this marketing material. You cannot drop 150lbs from the Model 3 motor because it doesn’t even weigh 150lbs.
    - catapart 1y ago
      You're missing the forest for the trees. Dropping 10 lbs per motor is HUGE. Dropping 30 is amazing. Whatever is dropped, it's significant. Pretend that it isn't all you want, but anyone doing production work knows how important this is. I'm happy to compare apples to apples when we can do that, and if you want me to say I was wrong about the Tesla motor size I'm happy to say that I was just going by what was available on the internet and skipped the details. But I did so in service of a point which you still haven't actually engaged with beyond "Nu uh!".
      - Aurornis 1y ago
        > Dropping 10 lbs per motor is HUGE. Auto makers could drop 10lbs, 100lbs or even more from every EV right now by choosing more expensive materials, more expensive manufacturing processes, or simply cutting back on amenities. 10lbs is not significant in the grand scheme of things. The real question is how much it costs, what are the tradeoffs, and how practical is it. > But I did so in service of a point which you still haven't actually engaged with beyond "Nu uh!". That’s not a fair take on what I’ve been posting at all. I said every little bit helps, but pointed out that motor sizes are already small.l
        catapart 1y ago
        10 lbs per motor in an aircraft is huge. And the fact that they can do it WITHOUT having to use more expensive materials or manufacturing or amenities is the thing that is huge about it. It's a fair take on your responses because talking about a SINGLE motor is missing the point. You're not engaging with the actual point that OP made, you're trying to dispute OP by engaging in your own point about what difference this would make in single-motor cars, instead of what difference it will make in general.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        > 10 lbs per motor in an aircraft is huge. That's cool but the conversation was about cars. It's a welcome but tiny improvement for cars. Even after you multiply by 2 or 4, especially because the more motors a car has the smaller they are.
- elihu 1y ago
  Nah, the main thing is that electric motors are already far better than they need to be -- even assuming the claims are all true, it would only make a small difference. Shaving a couple percent off the total vehicle weight would still be a very good thing, but improving batter energy density by 10% or so would be a bigger deal for most EVs. There might be some niche applications where the battery weight isn't the biggest issue -- like very short-range, light-weight vehicles that need to have enormous amounts of power for some reason. I could see motors like this being used in power tools if they can be scaled down. A light-weight plug-in electric chainsaw would be pretty awesome.
  - nandomrumber 1y ago
    > A light-weight plug-in electric chainsaw would be pretty awesome. These already exist, in both plug-in and cordless / battery powered.
    - elihu 1y ago
      Small wimpy ones are widely available. I'd love to have an electric chainsaw that runs on 220v and has a respectably long bar, but those don't seem to be available in the US as far as I can tell. At 30 amps and 220 volts, that would be about 8 horsepower. I think most motors that size rated for that much continuous power would be rather heavy.
whamlastxmas 1y ago
Range in EVs is impacted very little by weight
- gogusrl 1y ago
  Exactly. I was very surprised to find out a fully loaded 40 ton electric truck only uses ~100kw / 100km ( https://www.youtube.com/@electrictrucker https://www.youtube.com/@electrictrucker ) when my 2 ton Volvo averages 20-22kw/100km on road trips.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - hinkley 1y ago
    Superfastmatt did a test recently where he proved to himself that the front area of the vehicle and trailer is the dominant factor on mileage, not the weight towed or friction. For a guy trying to drive 300 mph though maybe he should have been able to do that with math instead of sketchy road tests.
  - ninalanyon 1y ago
    kWh not kW.
  - nandomrumber 1y ago
    Newton’s first law helps out a lot here.
hinkley 1y ago
Looks like it’s about 45 kg for a Tesla and 13 kg for this one. It at twice the horsepower. So maybe 8-10kg for a down rated model. IIRC, axial motors need their diameter to retain their efficiency advantage so a down rated one would likely be lighter but close to the same external dimensions. But that’s still a lot less rotating mass, and might make multiple motors attractive again.

Aurornis 1y ago

> It drops a buck fifty per motor. That IS a game changer. You’re reading their marketing material. You have to think of this like all of those PR releases you’ve seen over the years about new battery technology that is 4X smaller or new hard drive tech that is 10X more efficient. The real world improvements aren’t going to be as big as their one lab test. A Model 3 motor is already well under 150lbs, unless you start including ancillaries like the inverter and power transmission parts. They’re not dropping “a buck fifty” from typical EV motors.

catapart 1y ago
I'm not reading anyone's marketing material. If you want to dispute the shipping weight, feel free to correct this website whom I assume charges for shipping based on weight [0]. I'm sure they'd love to know they have it wrong. According to purchasable equipment, the Model 3 engines weight ~175 lbs. If that's wrong, that's on them for claiming it. Subtract 28 lbs from that and you're at 147 lbs. That is very close to 150 lbs. [0] https://evshop.eu/en/electric-motors/295-tesla-model-3-drive-unit-with-controller.html https://evshop.eu/en/electric-motors/295-tesla-model-3-drive...
- Aurornis 1y ago
  That’s a drive unit, which is more than the motor. Read the description: > This kit includes the Tesla motor, inverter, gear box, power cables and drive shafts. Drive shafts, gearbox, power cables, inverter. Also includes the mounts, which is likely not factored into the lab calculations for this marketing material. You cannot drop 150lbs from the Model 3 motor because it doesn’t even weigh 150lbs.
  - catapart 1y ago
    You're missing the forest for the trees. Dropping 10 lbs per motor is HUGE. Dropping 30 is amazing. Whatever is dropped, it's significant. Pretend that it isn't all you want, but anyone doing production work knows how important this is. I'm happy to compare apples to apples when we can do that, and if you want me to say I was wrong about the Tesla motor size I'm happy to say that I was just going by what was available on the internet and skipped the details. But I did so in service of a point which you still haven't actually engaged with beyond "Nu uh!".
    - Aurornis 1y ago
      > Dropping 10 lbs per motor is HUGE. Auto makers could drop 10lbs, 100lbs or even more from every EV right now by choosing more expensive materials, more expensive manufacturing processes, or simply cutting back on amenities. 10lbs is not significant in the grand scheme of things. The real question is how much it costs, what are the tradeoffs, and how practical is it. > But I did so in service of a point which you still haven't actually engaged with beyond "Nu uh!". That’s not a fair take on what I’ve been posting at all. I said every little bit helps, but pointed out that motor sizes are already small.l
      - catapart 1y ago
        10 lbs per motor in an aircraft is huge. And the fact that they can do it WITHOUT having to use more expensive materials or manufacturing or amenities is the thing that is huge about it. It's a fair take on your responses because talking about a SINGLE motor is missing the point. You're not engaging with the actual point that OP made, you're trying to dispute OP by engaging in your own point about what difference this would make in single-motor cars, instead of what difference it will make in general.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        > 10 lbs per motor in an aircraft is huge. That's cool but the conversation was about cars. It's a welcome but tiny improvement for cars. Even after you multiply by 2 or 4, especially because the more motors a car has the smaller they are.
elihu 1y ago
Nah, the main thing is that electric motors are already far better than they need to be -- even assuming the claims are all true, it would only make a small difference. Shaving a couple percent off the total vehicle weight would still be a very good thing, but improving batter energy density by 10% or so would be a bigger deal for most EVs. There might be some niche applications where the battery weight isn't the biggest issue -- like very short-range, light-weight vehicles that need to have enormous amounts of power for some reason. I could see motors like this being used in power tools if they can be scaled down. A light-weight plug-in electric chainsaw would be pretty awesome.
- nandomrumber 1y ago
  > A light-weight plug-in electric chainsaw would be pretty awesome. These already exist, in both plug-in and cordless / battery powered.
  - elihu 1y ago
    Small wimpy ones are widely available. I'd love to have an electric chainsaw that runs on 220v and has a respectably long bar, but those don't seem to be available in the US as far as I can tell. At 30 amps and 220 volts, that would be about 8 horsepower. I think most motors that size rated for that much continuous power would be rather heavy.

whamlastxmas 1y ago

Range in EVs is impacted very little by weight

gogusrl 1y ago
Exactly. I was very surprised to find out a fully loaded 40 ton electric truck only uses ~100kw / 100km ( https://www.youtube.com/@electrictrucker https://www.youtube.com/@electrictrucker ) when my 2 ton Volvo averages 20-22kw/100km on road trips.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- hinkley 1y ago
  Superfastmatt did a test recently where he proved to himself that the front area of the vehicle and trailer is the dominant factor on mileage, not the weight towed or friction. For a guy trying to drive 300 mph though maybe he should have been able to do that with math instead of sketchy road tests.
- ninalanyon 1y ago
  kWh not kW.
- nandomrumber 1y ago
  Newton’s first law helps out a lot here.

hinkley 1y ago

Looks like it’s about 45 kg for a Tesla and 13 kg for this one. It at twice the horsepower. So maybe 8-10kg for a down rated model. IIRC, axial motors need their diameter to retain their efficiency advantage so a down rated one would likely be lighter but close to the same external dimensions. But that’s still a lot less rotating mass, and might make multiple motors attractive again.