Quote:
Originally Posted by GREG
For the test cars they were using Proton cars. A small hatchback and a 4wd.
The motoring jouralists that were on the track seemed very impressed and one mentioned that it was a lot better than a Tesla he had previously tested.
|
I also took their test Proton out for a turn around their go-kart track and it was indeed very impressive. A motor in each wheel gives the ability to very accurately control exactly how much power and torque goes to each wheel, so you could throw the car into very tight bends and it just pulled you round, actively increasing the speed of the outside wheel. The original petrol version would have just understeered off the track. I think the Wankel engine they use in the bigger EVs is of their own design and nothing to do with Mazda – as well as buying Bristol they acquired the rights to the Wankel design a couple of years ago. Ridding the vehicle of traditional gearbox and transmission assemblies is the most efficient way to make the most of the very different torque and power characteristics that an electric motor has compared with petrol (and diesel) engines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimfoz
No-one with 150-250k in Russia and China will buy an electric Wankel car anyway. Part of the wealth status over there is being seen to drive a car with a V8 or V12 engine that bearly manages 15-20mpg. If they go around in an electric car, rivals will think they are poor and economising! This is why the likes of Jaguar and Range Rover sell many more of the V8 supercharged models in China or Russia than they do the diesels.
|
While it is true that thirst = status in some circles, the fact remains that in many countries very thirsty cars will simply be legislated out of existence (or at least usability) at some point in the future. Why should Bristol not be at the vanguard of the next generation of hybrid vehicle? Looking even further ahead, this technology will still perfectly suitable if fuel cells replace the Wankel to generate electricity.