Comments by "geemy" (@geemy9675) on "Engineering Explained" channel.

  1. 158
  2. 85
  3. 42
  4. 21
  5. 15
  6. 15
  7. 13
  8. 9
  9. 9
  10. 9
  11. 8
  12. 8
  13. 8
  14. 8
  15. 7
  16. 7
  17. 7
  18. 7
  19. 6
  20. 6
  21. 6
  22. 6
  23. some mentioned the delay that is visible between in the initial footage where the car is stopped and both the steering wheel and the wheel are visible. is it noticeable/annoying when driving? Also you failed to mention variable gear ratio steering has been implemented and abandoned by both Honda (Honda S2000 VGS) and Toyota (Land Cruiser VGRS) in the 2000s ... it would be interesting to see a comparison, to see if they improved the technology, or if it's just making a comeback because it makes more sense in EV's with large screens, yokes, and self driving around the corner. Personally I think it makes sense because: 1 it allows the driver to have a more consistent range of motion at low and high speeds 2 forcing the driver to do 3 full rotations of the steering wheel for three point turns is not great if you can have power steering that allows you to do it without taking your hands off the steering wheel 3 having less sensitive/slower steering at high speeds can be a good thing but they are concerns though, like 1 the learning curve, is it more dangerous when you're not used to it or someone borrows your car? it could be fixed with settings though 2 how to handle switching frequently between cars with fixed and variable steering. 3 how is muscle memory affected for emergencies, like quick steering adjustments to avoid a car that tries to merge into you, or oversteer/loss of traction 4 how it feels in a long corner with a radius that tightens or widens, to have the ratio change as your speed increases or decreases, and have the steering change with a constant steering wheel input....
    6
  24. 6
  25. 5
  26. 5
  27. 5
  28. 5
  29. 5
  30. 5
  31. 5
  32. 5
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 4
  36. 4
  37. 4
  38. 4
  39. 4
  40. 4
  41. 4
  42. 4
  43. 4
  44. 4
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3
  51.  @Tosix98  interesting! where did you get all those numbers ? I would have thought initially rear motor would be used for low speed acceleration to take advantage of the weight transfer and additional traction in the rear like the taycan rear 2 speed transmission but it actually makes sense considering there is already 1000hp pushing on those rear tires and a lot of torque in first gears so it makes sense to use eAWD for launch with a shorter gearing in the front for torque. it will definitely need clutches in the front to disconnect the motors at higher speeds, the motors wouldn't like being spun above redline and the drag would be VERY significant. we already know from the video that the rear motor can be disconnected too. it's pretty unique to see a plug in hybrid with three electric motors that can be independently disconnected EDIT forget what I said I read too quickly and missed tje fact that you were talking about the nevera. the Bugatti website does have quite detailed spec. the three motor seem to be identical with 24krpm, 250kW PSM eMotors Bugatti gives wheel torque in the front (3000Nm total) and motor torque in the rear 240Nm if the motors are identical, it means 6.25 gear reduction in the front ! meaning the 2 front motors are able to spin up to 507kph ! I don't see a reason for them to not gear the motors for top speed.....this could mean the tourbillon is engineered to achieve 507mph too speed. It would make sense to one up the chiron, break the 500kph limit and production. car WR with a small 1% margin of error who knows what happens at those speeds maybe the tires expand?.... it's probably all based on simulations and dyno runs at the moment. it s likely that the "base" version will never pass 445kph limit. it makes sense to have one version for all out top speed an breaking records, that will only achieve top speed after several miles of straight line? but for real life, whatever insane too speed needs to be reached quickly enough, with some power reserve. not everyone has access to a privatew perfectly smooth track with 10 miles of straight line
    3
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. From my point of view, there is no debate over blended braking. every EV should offer it. the cost argument is irrelevant EV should offer different braking modes depending on driver preferences: -weak/strong regen braking on lifting accelerator pedal -creep mode vs coming to full stop when not touching any pedal -zero/weak/strong regen blended on the brake pedal depending on compromise between efficiency/battery heat management/battery wear/pedal brake feel/disc brakes life also -blended braking should feel as good or better than traditional brake pedal feel -I love my (2013 technology) fiat 500e blended braking pedal feel 100% better than my gas car in terms of initial bite/progressivity/braking power -situations where you need strong and frequent braking like track or fast canyon driving means also better range is much needed, thus strong regen is a no brainer -future of brake technology is brake by wire and replacing all the hydraulic brake/ brake boost/ABS equipment with simpler, quicker and more accurate electric actuators, with better ABS on all surfaces, and accurate front/rear / inner/outer wheels brake bias. all the system -I will never use one pedal driving as long as I have option for weaker regen on the gas pedal and strong regen on the brake pedal. I want to be able to cover the brake pedal when I feel an increased risk, without slwing down the car suddenly, or trigerring the brake light. And also be able to alert the reat driver with a vry slight touch of the brake pedal. Tesla one pedal driving does not allow any of this, and limits maximum regen to a very low amount.
    2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85.  @Tosix98  small but powerful! Bugatti did their homework , picking very powerful cells and sizing the battery to be just big enough to achieve the power they wanted, with virtually no impact on weight compared to the chiron and managed to make a NA plugin hybrid with same or even lower weight and 15-20% more power. this is very unique in the hybrid world I can't name a single hybrid, let alone a plugin, that weighs less than it's gas counterpart/predecessor. also smart aero engineering with the massive diffuser, eAWD/driveshaft delete, lower roof/narrower cabin designing the battery, they did not care about energy but power and weight. this is the only way for a very high performance hybrid or even EV. performance car are not about ramge. the battery density is low but 29C discharge rate is extreme. for comparison, the plaid powertrain is limited by battery output at 7.6C. it's a 5x smaller battery that m achieves 80% of the power. of course, there has to be compromises.. -energy density is 2x lower so the power/weight gain is about x2. that's still a 200kg weight saving. electric range is compromised but who cares. -the second compromise is like for any hybrid with powerful electric motors, the sustained power output once the battery is drained you have lost 45% power. if 250 is about the speed that can be achieved on gas alone with 1000hp, driving any speed over 250 will start draining the battery. the faster you drive the faster battery drains. this is probably one of the reason why the limited the top speed. 1000hp @250moh means 1350hp at 276mph/445kph this means about a capacity of a little under 5 min of top speed if the battery was full and depleted to 0%. this is actually not so bad when you consider a chiron would drains it's tank in 10- 15 min at that speed anyway. realistically, no road or track exist to achieve this anyway. they have gone to a (base) chiron that can go 260 for 10 min at best to a tourbillon that can go ~280 for 5 min then 250 for another. this doesn't even have an impact on a cannonball race, even the most reckless driver won't be able to drain the battery
    2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. 2
  93. 2
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117.  @ctbrahmstedt  a smaller , forced induction engine with wide powerband and similar power to a larger diesel engine doesn't need 50 gears to haul. actually it doesn't even need more gears if it has similarly shaped torque curve. what's important is the ability to make high power (let's say > 70% of peak power for instance) at low rpms (ex 50% of redline) . the actual torque value and roms don't matter it's the ratios that do. with a wide power band you can do with 5 or 6 speeds no problem. the reason why modern cars, even turbocharged, have more and more gears is EPA emissions/mpg ratings and the need to have super tall gearing for highway cruising, and be able to run at the most efficient rpm at any speed. super tall gears are pointless for towing anyway. when you start factoring in towing reliability, you also need your engine that can put out high loads for long periods without overheating or high wear. this can be done on smaller engine. just look at some small japanese engines that are built with such high reliability standards they can run at high loads reliably even after being tuned (properly). but then you also need to consider transmission cooling, so I'm the end you just can't find a complete off the shelf package with smaller gas engine truck that can tow heavy loads for hundreds thousand miles reliably and if you need it you just go for a dedicated big diesel hauler but let's say you haul once year, you can use any engine that will maintain safe speeds within safe operating condition of the engine the miles will generate maybe double or triple the wear compared to just cruising, but that's what engines are meant to do on the end, it's power, not torque, that says if you can accelerate and move a heavy load at a certain speed. you can generate lot of torque with your arms using a big wrench, or legs on a bicycle, but it doesn't mean you can tow anything
    1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. fake shifter and clutch doesn't work from a pure performance point of vue but if you are a human driver, not an AI and maybe can't control the accelerator pedal with 1% precision, shifts are useful also on a track as a way to limit your torque below the point you would be losing traction, or precisely adjust your engine braking. discreet gears give you reference points like downshifting in a breaking zone, knowing in what gear you are in a corner gives you a better sense of speed, shifting/short shifting out of a corner with low grip, where a classic EV control with a single speed gives you only one way to control power with your right foot. but considering those EV's with lot of advanced electronics/traction control/torque vectoring can probably do it better than you. but if you are considering a more analog experience with esp disabled, it can make some sense. same for dirt bike riders who say that on electric dirt bikes they are missing their clutch lever that gives them an additional way to control power out of a corner or in technical Enduro/trial, less sensitive to shocks/vibration than twisting a throttle. from a more daily driving perspective, gears are also an additional input that allow you to control the sportiness/ smoothness compromise as well as the amount of engine braking/Regen. like an instant chill/normal/sport switch . by limiting the max power or Max Regen, you also give more precise control to the driver. but then in this scenario you don't really need to fake a redline. another situation where I like to use a manual mode wether it's on a stick(duh)/dct/auto/CVT in mountains when you have long down hills as an easy way to control your speed without the need to be always on the brake pedal. you can always find a gear in the straight that will maintain a speed close to your desired speed with no foot on the pedals while still letting you break/accelerate. strong one foot Regen like on Tesla's will slow you down, cruise control will deactivate when you accelerate or brake. So basically even though cars are becoming smarter and smarter, taking over more and more of your work, controls are getting simpler too, sometimes "too" simple (one foot driving) and at the same time remove some of your control. for instance one pedal controlling -75kW to +760kW is not something you always want to have when you are just driving in traffic. less controls is ok if you want to give away driving to a self driving car. that being said, my 500e which has only 111hp, strong Regen braking linked to the brake pedal, and zero driving mode/Regen setting, and a single speed, works perfectly for me a daily driver that can easily be driven smoothly or hard. single speed direct drive is for me the closest to a manual transmission in the sense that it gives a direct connection between the accelerator pedal and the motor. as much as I don't like auto transmissions, I don't miss my clutch pedal at all
    1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. maybe tesla semi will be able to gain significant time thanks to better performance and regen ? easier to pass slow vehicles, quicker to accelerate in stop and go traffic, and better brakes thanks to regen, so you dont have to keep as much distance with the vehicles in front, so it could maintain a similar average speed while cruising a few mph slower. it seems tesla went full on efficiency with the two disconnectable motors. they probably also have different gearing to allow always sending torque to the motor(s) in the best rpm range ? I wouldn't be surprised if the hummer EV with a (max rated) large 7500 pounds trailer is barely more efficient (if any) than an 82k lbs loaded semi...it only got .9kWh/mile with a 5000lbs trailer and 1.52kWh at 75mph with a 6000lbs camper... I am sure tesla semi driver will quickly learn how to optimize the cruising speed/ charging stops to get as quickly as possible to their destination. most probably they will go faster whenever they have partial load or a drive shorter than 500miles, and otherwise will findn out the quickest way to travel long distance. provided you have v4/megacharger on your route, probably drive according to speed limits/ flow of traffic, drain the battery below 5-10% and make use of the fastest charging that happens at low SoC (at least on all current) tesla models, and leave as soon as the have enough range or as soon as charging slows down significantly BTW lot of semis don't always follow speed limits, if you drive the speed limit you'll have a fair amount of semis passing you, which is a good reason not to follow the speed limits....
    1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. "if you think about what is ideal with the torque curve basically you just want it to be as wide as possible and as flat as possible" (just like your mom?) this is only thinking with combustion engine mindset. from a perfocmance point of view and for similar peak power, the perfect POWER curve would be a flat one, so torque curve would be a hyperbola 😉 of course your torque cannot be infinite, and below a certain speed, increasing torque above a certain level gives zero performance advantage and will only break parts more quickly or require to overbuild them, so you have to limit to a max value. this is pretty much the tesla Plaid perfect power/torque curve. as much constant torque as tires cam manage from 0-60, then as much constant power as the battery can deliver and the cooling system handle, from 60 to 200mph ..but even with a combustion engine, flat power curve means you don't need gears, or only a few of them, to maintain maximum sustained acceleration. Now if you introduce another parameter which is cruising efficiency, you're going back to transmissions with a lot of speeds (8-10), just for the sake of being able to run the engine with optimal gearing for efficiency, at any cruising speed. of course in real world you have rpm limited by piston/valves/conrod/camshaft, and torque limited by displacement and max boost, and engine/gearbox internals, so you want to combine both with maintaining max torque as much as possible across the rpm range, and because the power is only limited by fuel pump/injectors, you can always increase them to get rid of the power cap, which is easier than increasing displacement, boost, or rpms But you think outside the box and consider CVTs....the best torque curve is ANY torque curve ^^ as long as you have good efficiency at medium/low load/rpm and good power at high rpm/load
    1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. ​ @vl3005 there are a few parameters that can impact the acceleration curve. - the demon uses a clutch which can be both a disadvantage because it's harder to do consistent perfect launches even with launch control, and clutch will overheat after a very hard launch, but it also means the engine and flywheel are storing rotational energy that can be released almost instantly at launch. usually more an advantage for EV with AWD and good launch control but it seems here with perfect conditions the demon 170 launched even harder than anything else -the demon can hit 60 in first gear so there is no gear shift delay or power loss in the 0-60. with proper tire temperature and surface, and good launch control, it can be constantly at the very limit of tire grip from 0 to 60 hence the amazing 0-60. during the quarter mile it will need to shift 4 times to reach ~150 so each time you have interruption in power, qnd power loss after the shift with lower rpm (demon doesn't have a flat power and) so the plaid could gain maybe around 0.1s for each shift -demon has higher power to weight ratio so when it's right at peak power, and putting down all the power to the ground it has higher peak Gs than the plaid.but in average very slightly lower. - as speed increases above 60mph, and the demon shifts gears, and the plaid loses torque, acceleration slows down, and air resistance increases. the weight becomes less and less important, and air drag becomes more important. this is why the plaid wins at higher speeds because much better coefficient 0.208 vs 0.37, the demon has almost 90% more drag ! 1/2 mile would probably be won by the plaid (only if unlocked to 200mph) so the plaid with same horsepower has the potential to have 23% higher top speed. a 840hp demon did 211,1025hp could do at least 225 and an Tesla plaid could do 277... so a demon getting close to 200 Would be accelerating very slowly (70% pushing air, 30% accelerating) whereas a plaid doing 200 Would would be doing more like 30% pushing air , 70% accelerating.
    1
  255. 1