Just remember that the i3 has strong regen, RWD, a short wheelbase and is lightweight. It would be insightful to go test drive one and see how the regen effects vehicle dynamics. Just go into a corner and lift off the throttle and see what it does. I've never done this, and am not responsible for the result! However, you should be fine because of the stability control.Actually, David99 agrees with you "when pushing things to the extreme".
He just doesn't believe EV Regen is powerful enough to necessitate being on the front axle.
If it's true that Tesla regen is only -60kW, the rear wheels could probably handle all of that, w/o too much drama (considering Tesla's long wheelbase and 4300-4900 lb curb weight).
I appreciate all the information being shared here, it was very revealing.
I still suspect Tesla is sandbagging on Regen.
In which case, AWD seems less essential again.
This is the problem with having 2Y to research your car purchase
sighActually, David99 agrees with you "when pushing things to the extreme".
He just doesn't believe EV Regen is powerful enough to necessitate being on the front axle.
If it's true that Tesla regen is only -60kW, the rear wheels could probably handle all of that, w/o too much drama (considering Tesla's long wheelbase and 4300-4900 lb curb weight).
I appreciate all the information being shared here, it was very revealing.
I still suspect Tesla is sandbagging on Regen.
In which case, AWD seems less essential again.
This is the problem with having 2Y to research your car purchase
To add a little, it's not that the torque is so low during regen, it's that the deceleration is so low during regen. Remember that the load transfer which unloads the rear tires is a function of deceleration. The 70% number that people reference is at or near max braking of ~1.0g. The deceleration g's for regen are <=0.3g, hence the load transfer is less than a third of the peak value seen during a panic stop. So during max regen the rears may unload 10% and the fronts load up 10%. As stated above, this light unloading is within the ability of the rear tire to maintain traction most of the time.
I disagree, but let's see. The standard calculation may not be applicable, because the cost of producing batteries will vary by multiple factors but one of those includes just how dense you want them to be. There is a lot of variability in batteries from manufacturing and so it allows for different pricing at different levels. The quality needed to achieve 100 kwh in a model s for example is very different from what they'll need for, say, 50 kWh in a model 3 or 75 kWh. That's why the regular upgrade for 10 marginal kWh on a model S is not a direct translation to the model 3.
I don't really get this thread. There is only a certain amount of kinetic energy at any given speed that can be potentially captured. Capturing it faster would slow the car down faster, but wouldn't capture any more energy because there is only so much to capture in the first place. It might even capture less because the faster the rate the more will be converted to heat.
(Which I know you never do, given your efficiency numbers.) Since you're wasting energy in all sorts of ways if you are driving like that, it's probably not really worth it.This is isn't about whether the energy can currently be captured, it's whether the energy can be captured while driving like a maniac and braking hard.
