When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
A question for you. Why the word Turbo and Turbo S models if they are ALL EV'S?
I am assuming there is no ICE in any of these models of the Taycan,
Also do you know what the lap times are on the Nürburgring ring for these different models if they are ALL full EV'S and NO ICE.
Thanks in advance.
PS:: I own a KIA EV6-GT and I am very please with the performance and handling of this 4 door.
You're correct, they are all full electric powered. I have the 4S just below the Turbo and Turbo S. I'm not familiar with their track specs. I know that the Turbo S does very well. My car handles very well. The batteries are positioned very low, aiding to a low center of gravity, complimenting handling. It drives and handles like a Porsche. It's my 3rd one and first all electric. All wheel drive, and rear wheel steering.
No, Ferrari is gone. But, thanks for the compliment. Sold a few years ago. And purchased a Mercedes GTS, AMG Very fast car. 10.8's 1/4 mile Pretty much stock.
I now have a Porsche Taycan 4S Pic attached.
However, I've been a Corvette guy for many years. The Corvette ERay may be the perfect combo with the electric front motor, providing
Apparently when it comes to torque vectoring, some people can't comprehend basic facts, or are just in denial.
Torque vectoring requires 2 independently controlled electric motors, one on each hub.
Regardless, the E-Ray does NOT have torque vectoring, not matter what BS some may try to spew.
Apparently when it comes to torque vectoring, some people can't comprehend basic facts, or are just in denial.
Torque vectoring requires 2 independently controlled electric motors, one on each hub.
Regardless, the E-Ray does NOT have torque vectoring, not matter what BS some may try to spew.
I think you have a career in mainstream media waiting for you--if you ever choose to pursue it. Your clearly have the knack for it.
Apparently when it comes to torque vectoring, some people can't comprehend basic facts, or are just in denial.
Torque vectoring requires 2 independently controlled electric motors, one on each hub.
Regardless, the E-Ray does NOT have torque vectoring, not matter what BS some may try to spew.
Hmm, suggest you read a bit more, understand what a differential does and how with modest braking power of the inside front wheel the outside wheel in a turn gets even more power! It's the principle of a differential.
And mechanical AWD Porsches, for example, get great torque vectoring with a mechanical dif similar to rear eLSD in a Vette! NOPE powering each front wheel with a separate electric motor and drive control is not the only way to get torque vectoring!
Here is some more info for YOU to digest!
What Are the Benefits of Torque Vectoring by Braking?
Even if you aren't on a race track you'll be able to experience the benefits in turns and twisty roads with torque vectoring by braking: Increased stability control. Correction of oversteer or understeer. Improved traction in challenging driving conditions, even when driving a straight line. In this type of application, torque vectoring through braking can be used. This system works by using the brakes to stop a wheel from slipping. This allows more power to be sent to the wheels that still have grip, improving a car's ability to accelerate on slippery roads or accelerate out of tight corners.
The primary goal of a torque-vectoring system is to redistribute torque predictively between the driven wheels to optimize stability. For instance, when cornering, the system can send more torque to the wheel on the outside corner.
Yep some cars use front brakes for Torque Vectoring, it’s just as good. The downside is if Tracking the brakes could overheat, hench a key reason, IMO, for the CCBs standard. For street driving where there is not sustained use so overheating is a non-issue. Using brakes selectively the system works by applying the inside wheel brake in a turn to reduced power applied to the wheel. Since there is a differential in the axle it doesn’t take a lot of braking force AND it supplies even more power to the outside wheel and helps pull the car around the turn. It prevents oversteer inherent in front wheel drive cars. It allows more power to be applied sooner after an apex then say is possible with the RWD Z06.
When gas was only available every other day in the early 1980's bought a Turbo FWD compact. Installed Plus 1 Perelli’s and other mods. Applying power out of an apex just pushed you off the road. I had to use a technique folks employed racing Mini’s and similar FWD cars. Before applying power out of a turn, stabbed the rear emergency brake (finger on locking button, racers just removed.) That caused the rear tires to slide out like an oversteering car. When it was pointed where you wanted to go then could apply power! It was fun.
Maybe of interest, if you research eSLD GM has patents on its first use on FWD cars to counter torque steer and understeering. With the E-Ray, computers are taking input from throttle position, lateral "g" force, tire friction on each wheel etc etc and controlling power to all wheels to help get max speed thru a corner!
PS: If not for you perhaps others would like to review, this good summary of a many page, bit hard to understand Ask Tadge Post where he had the engineer who is in charge of the eLSD software write most. I summarized BUT included the full Tadge post in the appendix: http://netwelding.com/eLSD_VS_Posi.pdf
The appendix also includes 4 video's. There are two describing how a dif works. It's easy to stop power going to one wheel of the other. With car running in gear, up on jack stands, can grab one spinning wheel with your hands. The other wheel turns faster and is taking all the engine torque.
How Positraction Works:
This video by Professor Kelly is 1 hour but shows Positraction was developed by Dana in like 1959 and all manufactures use it with different names. He takes 11 systems apart and shows what they do, including a Torson. It's purely mechanical. Leonardo Da Vinci would have loved the simplicity It's all you get with the Base C8!
Torque vectoring requires 2 independently controlled electric motors, one on each hub.
Regardless, the E-Ray does NOT have torque vectoring, not matter what BS some may try to spew.
The main things they would gain from 2 independent motors, one per hub, would be much faster and more precise control over the applied torques, and the ability to regen during vectoring.
The brake based system used now can still generate very similar yaw moments to a dual-motor, just not with the same precision and with a good amount of wasted heat and brake material.
The main things they would gain from 2 independent motors, one per hub, would be much faster and more precise control over the applied torques, and the ability to regen during vectoring.
The brake based system used now can still generate very similar yaw moments to a dual-motor, just not with the same precision and with a good amount of wasted heat and brake material.
Maybe most vette drivers with generally low mileage/year.. The CCB's good to 100K miles will never see rotor replacement.
You're correct, they are all full electric powered. I have the 4S just below the Turbo and Turbo S. I'm not familiar with their track specs. I know that the Turbo S does very well. My car handles very well. The batteries are positioned very low, aiding to a low center of gravity, complimenting handling. It drives and handles like a Porsche. It's my 3rd one and first all electric. All wheel drive, and rear wheel steering.
I bet your car is pretty fast as well?
Thanks,
I did a bit of research and the Taycan Turbo S did the RING in 7:33:33 matching what a C7 Z51 also did at 7:33.
Yes, My KIA EV6-GT is pretty fast and although is a small SUV the engineers at KIA did a great job with the handling.
The main things they would gain from 2 independent motors, one per hub, would be much faster and more precise control over the applied torques, and the ability to regen during vectoring.
The brake based system used now can still generate very similar yaw moments to a dual-motor, just not with the same precision and with a good amount of wasted heat and brake material.
Yep agree a downside to the E-Ray using brakes to Torque Vectoring approach (also used by others) is increase in brake temps. That could be a factor IF Tracking or Racing where there is sustained use. IMO the reason CCBs are standard as the E-Ray is built to Track (although any avid Tracker should get a Z06, IMO.) In even aggressive street driving it's not sustained. In addition, as I mentioned the E-Ray gearbox has an open differential so your not having to absorb half the 160 hp! As the brake is applied to the inside wheel in a turn the spider/side gear carrier rotates. Just as it does in any turn. it's an efficient no energy absorbing device.
In addition though electrons move at the speed of light overcoming motor rotational inertia is not instant. Also like ABS brakes that cycle at ~15 times a second and eLSD clutches at very high rate, not as fast but fast enough to be effective,
The mechanical systems used by AWS Porsche, Audi etc do a very effective job Torque Vectoring- albeit complex and expensive (see pic.)
Agree two electric motors and controllers managing the front wheels are efficient and effective but appears cars using brakes or mechanical systems do and effective job.
My Post 20 presented this from Automotive Engineering They discusses how the open differential operates efficiently. I put those words in bold.
"Question: Are there any significant differences between torque vectoring using the brakes and a true torque vectoring differential? (in terms of driving characteristics)
The knee-jerk reaction to torque vectoring using the brakes is that "it's not actually powering the outside wheel, it's just braking the inside", however of course that's not true; because the sum of a differential's output RPMs amounts to 2x the input RPM and it's all geared together with no slip, if the input is accelerating while one output is being slowed via the brakes, the other output must accelerate to a faster RPM than the input.
So, whether achieved through brakes or clutches, both create an identical yaw moment centered on the diff, depending on lockup.
Is the use of brakes not simply superior to a torque vectoring diff? It seems to be, and that would make sense given that torque vectoring diffs seem to be dying, however it's interesting that brake-based torque vectoring sort of has a bad name amongst car enthusiasts."
Mechanical Torque Vectoring Systems Used by AWD Porsche, Audi etc are Apparently Very Effective at Torque Vectoring, BUT Complex
The main things they would gain from 2 independent motors, one per hub, would be much faster and more precise control over the applied torques, and the ability to regen during vectoring.
The brake based system used now can still generate very similar yaw moments to a dual-motor, just not with the same precision and with a good amount of wasted heat and brake material.
bUt TaDgE sAid tHe e-RaY hAs tOrQuE vEcToRiNg !!!!!!!
Anyone with a brain and any reading comprehension knows the E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
I don't know why you or I waste our time responding to the low IQ fan bois around here.
bUt TaDgE sAid tHe e-RaY hAs tOrQuE vEcToRiNg !!!!!!!
Anyone with a brain and any reading comprehension knows the E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
I don't know why you or I waste our time responding to the low IQ fan bois around here.
Some of us with a "complete brain" that allows hearing, in the Steve Garrett Podcast, Tadge Juechter, Harlan Charles, Josh Holder talk about all the things they have to monitor to get quality Torque Vectoring like continually monitoring tire micro frication on all wheels all the time. Yep, several ways to control power separately to front wheels (actuality all wheels) in turns:
Brakes are one and a simple way in the front as the E-Ray (and other cars) use. It comes standard with eLSD that handles the rear wheels.
Mechanical AWD as Porsche, Audi etc have used where are no electric motors
bUt TaDgE sAid tHe e-RaY hAs tOrQuE vEcToRiNg !!!!!!!
Anyone with a brain and any reading comprehension knows the E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
I don't know why you or I waste our time responding to the low IQ fan bois around here.
Some of us with a "complete bran" that allows hearing! In the Steve Garrett Podcast, Tadge Juechter, Harlan Charles, Josh Holder talk about all the things they have to monitor to get quality Torque Vectoring like continually monitoring tire micro frication on all wheels all the time.
Yep, several ways to control power separately to front wheels (actuality all wheels) in turns:
Brakes are one and a simple way in the front as the E-Ray (and other cars) use. It comes standard with eLSD that handles the rear wheels.
Mechanical AWD as Porsche, Audi etc have used where are no electric motors
Yep separate electric motors and controllers another!
bUt TaDgE sAid tHe e-RaY hAs tOrQuE vEcToRiNg !!!!!!!
Anyone with a brain and any reading comprehension knows the E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
I don't know why you or I waste our time responding to the low IQ fan bois around here.
Yep agree a downside to the E-Ray using brakes to Torque Vectoring approach (also used by others) is increase in brake temps. That could be a factor IF Tracking or Racing where there is sustained use. IMO the reason CCBs are standard as the E-Ray is built to Track (although any avid Tracker should get a Z06, IMO.) In even aggressive street driving it's not sustained. In addition, as I mentioned the E-Ray gearbox has an open differential so your not having to absorb half the 160 hp! As the brake is applied to the inside wheel in a turn the spider/side gear carrier rotates. Just as it does in any turn. it's an efficient no energy absorbing device.
In addition though electrons move at the speed of light overcoming motor rotational inertia is not instant. Also like ABS brakes that cycle at ~15 times a second and eLSD clutches at very high rate, not as fast but fast enough to be effective,
The mechanical systems used by AWS Porsche, Audi etc do a very effective job Torque Vectoring- albeit complex and expensive (see pic.)
Agree two electric motors and controllers managing the front wheels are efficient and effective but appears cars using brakes or mechanical systems do and effective job.
My Post 20 presented this from Automotive Engineering They discusses how the open differential operates efficiently. I put those words in bold.
"Question: Are there any significant differences between torque vectoring using the brakes and a true torque vectoring differential? (in terms of driving characteristics)
The knee-jerk reaction to torque vectoring using the brakes is that "it's not actually powering the outside wheel, it's just braking the inside", however of course that's not true; because the sum of a differential's output RPMs amounts to 2x the input RPM and it's all geared together with no slip, if the input is accelerating while one output is being slowed via the brakes, the other output must accelerate to a faster RPM than the input.
So, whether achieved through brakes or clutches, both create an identical yaw moment centered on the diff, depending on lockup.
Is the use of brakes not simply superior to a torque vectoring diff? It seems to be, and that would make sense given that torque vectoring diffs seem to be dying, however it's interesting that brake-based torque vectoring sort of has a bad name amongst car enthusiasts."
Mechanical Torque Vectoring Systems Used by AWD Porsche, Audi etc are Apparently Very Effective at Torque Vectoring, BUT Complex
Very logical explanation......
Thanks for the details ! 🇺🇸😎🇺🇸
In addition, as I mentioned the E-Ray gearbox has an open differential so your not having to absorb half the 160 hp!
Ask 100 gearheads how a diff works, and maybe 1 of them understands the above. When the car rotates, the Torque out of the differential still splits evenly right and left, but the Power out of the diff does not split evenly, due to the wheelspeed difference. Braking on the inner wheel absorbs less power, and less heat as a result, for an equivalent braking torque. Where most folks go wrong is that they hear that power is transferred to the outside wheel during rotation with no braking(correct), and they assume this means that an inherent yaw moment is created by this power transfer in an unlocked diff without the need for differential braking (incorrect). Yaw moment is generated by a Torque imbalance, which is what the differential braking provides.
Originally Posted by JerryU
In addition though electrons move at the speed of light
If they did, my job would be much easier.
Originally Posted by JerryU
The knee-jerk reaction to torque vectoring using the brakes is that "it's not actually powering the outside wheel, it's just braking the inside", however of course that's not true; because the sum of a differential's output RPMs amounts to 2x the input RPM and it's all geared together with no slip, if the input is accelerating while one output is being slowed via the brakes, the other output must accelerate to a faster RPM than the input. So, whether achieved through brakes or clutches, both create an identical yaw moment centered on the diff, depending on lockup.
That's a bit of a simplistic article on that website - braking the inside may generate a similar yaw moment, but it does come with downsides. Torque Vectoring is a generic term, but what the E-Ray does is generally called differential braking. As everyone knows, the E-Ray uses an E-diff plus differential braking in the front. The E-diff and differential braking are both tools in the toolbox, for generating yaw moments and correcting under/oversteer. Give these 2 tools to 10 controls engineers, and they'll come up with 10 different algorithms on how to control them. In general, you can begin to get a little better picture of how they work by understanding their limitations.
The E-Diff, by varying its lock percentage, can generate small yaw moments. The E-Diff clutch basically couples both wheels together. By locking/unlocking it on corner entry for example, you can generate an opposing/assisting torque to counter over/understeer. One strategy used by GM and others, is to prioritize the E-diff first, and to try to generate the required yaw moments using only the E-diff and no differential braking. Either a P or PI controller is used to compare the vehicle yaw rate with the desired yaw rate, and adjust the lock percentage of the E-diff. The reason for the vehicle's yaw controller using the E-diff first, without differential braking, is that differential braking incurs a heat, friction and noise penalty, and differential braking generates a yaw moment only with a decelerative force, which scrubs speed. This is the opposite of what you may want, in some cases, on corner exit. Remember, when braking torque is applied to the inside wheel, Torque does not increase on the outside wheel. A dual-motor system, for example, can generate the same yaw moment with accelerative force on corner exit which may provide a performance benefit some of the time.
When the vehicle yaw controller maxes out the E-diff, and the vehicle yaw moment still exceeds a set threshold, the differential brakes are employed as they can generate a higher yaw moment than the E-diff alone. The added stability outweighs any decelerative disadvantage. Lots of ways to skin this cat, and the above control scheme may not be exactly describe the E-ray sequence of operation, but it has been presented by GM in several technical publications.
Apparently when it comes to torque vectoring, some people can't comprehend basic facts, or are just in denial.
Torque vectoring requires 2 independently controlled electric motors, one on each hub.
Regardless, the E-Ray does NOT have torque vectoring, not matter what BS some may try to spew.
Originally Posted by RiptideHTC
The E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
It needed 2 hub mounted independent EV motors for true torque vectoring, which is the standard for Hybrid performance cars like the Revuelto, SF90, etc.
Instead, E-Ray got a single, cheap, weak, center-mounted EV motor, probably sourced from the Cadillac Lyric, that is $3,500 option on the Lyric.
Originally Posted by RiptideHTC
bUt TaDgE sAid tHe e-RaY hAs tOrQuE vEcToRiNg !!!!!!!
Anyone with a brain and any reading comprehension knows the E-Ray does not have torque vectoring.
I don't know why you or I waste our time responding to the low IQ fan bois around here.
First, knew you were a gadfly spouting foolishness with your early comment about only hub mounted electric motors can perform Torque Vectoring. Before the E-Ray configuration was announced, an excellent automotive write, racer, engineer who usually has good, leaked info from his many GM friends suggested what could also have been a good solution. Don Sherman said it wasn't one center mounted electric motor it was two half the power motors mounted back-to-back in the center location. With low inertia axles mounted the way they are in the E-Ray. No need for a dif or possible heavy eSLD type device in the front. Far smarter that heavy hub mounted motors.
And the thought that they took the motor from a Caddy is also foolish. They bent over backward to come as close as possible to the C8 ME weight ration of 40/60. In addition to CCB's and a 12 Volt Li-Ion Battery they used an expensive Magnesium case AND very unusual high strength aluminum versus steel case bolts. Also, what they call a tiny differential. Not whatever is in a Caddy.
Bottom Line: I learn a lot about Vettes from many smart folks on the forum. Many contribute smart details. I've been reading car mags since ~13 (~1955.) Cars are just my hobby but have been a great relief from the day-to-day pressers of my profession. I appreciate the many smart folks on the Forum.
Ask 100 gearheads how a diff works, and maybe 1 of them understands the above. When the car rotates, the Torque out of the differential still splits evenly right and left, but the Power out of the diff does not split evenly, due to the wheelspeed difference. Braking on the inner wheel absorbs less power, and less heat as a result, for an equivalent braking torque. Where most folks go wrong is that they hear that power is transferred to the outside wheel during rotation with no braking(correct), and they assume this means that an inherent yaw moment is created by this power transfer in an unlocked diff without the need for differential braking (incorrect). Yaw moment is generated by a Torque imbalance, which is what the differential braking provides.
If they did, my job would be much easier.
That's a bit of a simplistic article on that website - braking the inside may generate a similar yaw moment, but it does come with downsides. Torque Vectoring is a generic term, but what the E-Ray does is generally called differential braking. As everyone knows, the E-Ray uses an E-diff plus differential braking in the front. The E-diff and differential braking are both tools in the toolbox, for generating yaw moments and correcting under/oversteer. Give these 2 tools to 10 controls engineers, and they'll come up with 10 different algorithms on how to control them. In general, you can begin to get a little better picture of how they work by understanding their limitations.
The E-Diff, by varying its lock percentage, can generate small yaw moments. The E-Diff clutch basically couples both wheels together. By locking/unlocking it on corner entry for example, you can generate an opposing/assisting torque to counter over/understeer. One strategy used by GM and others, is to prioritize the E-diff first, and to try to generate the required yaw moments using only the E-diff and no differential braking. Either a P or PI controller is used to compare the vehicle yaw rate with the desired yaw rate, and adjust the lock percentage of the E-diff. The reason for the vehicle's yaw controller using the E-diff first, without differential braking, is that differential braking incurs a heat, friction and noise penalty, and differential braking generates a yaw moment only with a decelerative force, which scrubs speed. This is the opposite of what you may want, in some cases, on corner exit. Remember, when braking torque is applied to the inside wheel, Torque does not increase on the outside wheel. A dual-motor system, for example, can generate the same yaw moment with accelerative force on corner exit which may provide a performance benefit some of the time.
When the vehicle yaw controller maxes out the E-diff, and the vehicle yaw moment still exceeds a set threshold, the differential brakes are employed as they can generate a higher yaw moment than the E-diff alone. The added stability outweighs any decelerative disadvantage. Lots of ways to skin this cat, and the above control scheme may not be exactly describe the E-ray sequence of operation, but it has been presented by GM in several technical publications.
Yep, great explanation of dif operation. Your comment: "Give these 2 tools to 10 controls engineers, and they'll come up with 10 different algorithms on how to control them." is what Jason Kolk the eLSD software engineer discussed in that "Ask Tadge" Forum post. His words are the bulk of that long several page forum post. I included the full post in the appendix of my summary PDF. I had to read a number of times but summarized the key points in the front of that PDF. As he notes there are a number of algorithms that are controlling and at any one time eLSD has to define which is best for the situation.
As Tadge said when they started the E-Ray hybrid design probably in 2012 and 2013 when the c8 design started in earnest, there was no existing model to follow. I thought an intersecting situation he described was if going up a long slipper hill and the battery energy is getting lower than desired. He said unlike when on a good traction surface where they turn the motor into a generator and let the LS2 turn it and recharge the battery in that situation they can't. That could create stability changes. For it and on some other slipper surface turns they just disengage the motor and flash a message on the dash saying FWD disengaged or some such words. As he said those are unusual situations but they have to cover all bases.
12-11-2023, 09:22 PM
