Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
The topic of the thread is why Tesla's are bad at towing, and the conclusion is that batteries suck and need to get better, much better.
I expanded the topic by mentioning it's not just energy capacity that matters, but how quickly it can be replenished. If it could be replenished very quickly, it matters less how big the "tank" is.
The point of a trailer isn't to be as aerodynamically efficient as possible, but to haul the intended cargo in a given footprint and weight rating. There's no "solution", only trade-offs.
The reason trailers don't have regen is because only 3% of vehicles are EV in the first place, and they already have regen built in. Redundantly adding it to a trailer adds weight, complexity and cost. It's not that it hasn't been thought of already, it's that people thought about it and then realized it was dumb.
|
* ' bad' is an unfortunate choice for an adjective.
* it's hard to imagine that an engineer would ever use such a descriptor.
* 'bad' is inclined to put people into emotional-reactional rather than rational thinking, as capitalized on in the 'behaviorism' psychology of the advertising industry.
* TFL cars.com stood on the world stage and revealed the poverty of their intellect when they did their piece.
* And Engineering Explained didn't do anyone any favors when they took the bait.
* Attributing deceitfulness to the fallacy of their testing methodology would have implied that they actually knew the physics involved in their arguments.
* Donald Rumsfeld's concept of 'known-knowns,' known- unknown's, and 'unknown-unknown's' probably better captures the actual shortcomings of the video presentations.
* If you want to see REAL RANGE ANXIETY and the dark underbelly of a RAM pickup or HUMMER, hitch them to that horse trailer, and redo the 75-mph 'test', except, give them a 'gas tank' the same size as the Tesla.
' If our vision be arrested here, let our imaginations pass beyond.' Blaise Pascal