View Single Post
Old 02-05-2011, 12:09 AM   #20 (permalink)
Clev
Wannabe greenie
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098

The Clunker (retired) - '90 Honda Accord EX sedan
Team Honda
90 day: 29.49 mpg (US)

Mountain Goat - '96 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 SuperCab
90 day: 18 mpg (US)

Zippy - '10 Kymco Agility 125
90 day: 65.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winfield1990 View Post
Go back and read what I posted...

im not doing the engine for weight distribution thats what the batteries are for , under the floor and in the rear where the rear seats are or are not depending on the vehicle the motor is there to be close to the drive wheels for efficiency and closer to the batteries.

just because the motors closer to the wheels for efficiency thats not because of driveline efficiency and quotations around a falsely quoted quote is a great way to get your point across..... btw...
You're doing the batteries for weight distribution, but you have to have them near the rear axle for efficiency. So which it? Either the batteries are in the FRONT of the car for proper weight distribution, or they're in the REAR of the car for 'efficiency.' Or, you know, you could put the motor in the front and the batteries in the back like everybody else, and then upsize your wiring by 10% to make up the difference.

Quote:
Efficiency due to traction , efficiency due to weight saving by not having as big of mechanical parts to make connections to the wheels. efficiency without a term coming before it is a general term.
Oh, right! I forgot the driveshaft! That's where I've gone wrong! Mount 300+ pounds of motor and tranny to the rear suspension so you can save 12 pounds on a driveshaft! Why didn't BMW think of that? Excuse me, I need to call the patent office...

Quote:
you got the first part of my quote right just to ask a question , but only in a sarcastic manner you obviously do not know the meaning of a real quote because you did not use it in any meaningful way so I wil ASSUME SO.... but if my car is infact like I already stated and you quoted on just above... the batteries are next to the motor , what would the circular shape of the car have anything to do with changed how the batteries are next to the motor ?
Because you said the batteries would be used for weight distribution, but they also are next to the motor for efficiency. If the batteries are in the front and back simultaneously, and the car is shaped like a regular car, maybe there's some kind of gravitational anomaly I'm not aware of.

Quote:
you cant change a true statement with an off the wall question...
example:
the cat is black right? , its raining outside so is it still black? NICE QUESTION clev , need to start asking the questions at the beginning of the conversations before their already answered by the poster.
You mean the poster who has already contradicted himself? Are they in the front for weight distribution or in the back for efficiency? I suspect we'll need to fire up the Large Hadron Collider to answer this one.

Quote:
and I am still here just to point out your misundestandings and assumptions , and now... whatever you say im gone. only reason besides pointing out the above.... Was I was looking in control panel for an account deletion check box or link which I cannot find.

So please , whoever is in the charge of the forum , please erase my account. Not just block , or cancel , but remove please. Thank you and im sorry for this rubbish being applied to your forum. There was no disrepect for the forum on my part done on purpose.
Where have I heard this before? I suspect there's a time loop of some kind now.
__________________

  Reply With Quote