this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
563 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

76623 readers
4457 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

How much torque though? HP is nice but power is in the torque as much if not more than the voltage(HP)

[–] Zink@programming.dev 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

The voltage/hp comparison there doesn't really fit.

Power is in watts or horsepower. You multiply the torque with the RPM and a scaling factor to get power.

A higher voltage system could probably be expected to produce more torque and power from the same size motor, but a lot depends on the design of the motor.

Then to answer "how much torque though," I haven't looked into it but electric motors have a very nice torque curve across the RPM range. If a motor made all that power with low torque, then it must spin at super high RPM and need to be geared down.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

That motor doesn't look like it has enough mass to properly make enough torque to drive the weight of a car even if said car it made entirely of carbon fiber

[–] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 11 hours ago

Totally, and I think that's why they thought it was worth a press release. In the article they go right to how they're setting a new power density record with this design.

Electric motors are just really power dense. The article says they managed a short term peak of 1,000 hp with that little flat 12.7kg motor and the continuous output could still be half that.

Just the cooling must be crazy.

Out of curiosity I looked up something comparable. It looks like high-performance integrated drive units that have other stuff like the single-speed gearbox, differential, and inverter are still only in the dozens of kg.

[–] Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml 2 points 20 hours ago

An engine for a third of the price of my weekly shopping trip….thats ace.

/s

[–] comrade19@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

300-400kW continuously should be the headline. Thats impressive. Lots of motors can try and make 1000hp if you feed them enough voltage but only for a split second before they overheat and burn out. I wonder how long it can do this 1000HP.

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Until someone tests it independently, this should be considered BS.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'll give them some credence based on the cars their motors are already used in and the fact that their parent company is Mercedes-Benz. Doesn't look like they're a bunch of grifters seeking investment.

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I suppose, but I'm skeptical of car manufacturer claims, too, until independent testing is done.

I hope this is real and think it's awesome, but will wait to see if they exaggerated.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

Well, the peak output is a useless number, that's just record chasing. I think the continuous output is the number we should be looking at. That is a bit more believable and also started in the article that that number is an estimate for now.

So IMO they're not making any wild claims. There's "we measured this huge output for a short burst" and "we think that over a long period, it can do this slightly smaller, but still impressive number, but it needs to be verified"

Will be cool to find out if the continuous output is close to their estimate of course, but even if it's lower, it's still impressive by virtue of the super low weight.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 54 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Did they update the page since you commented? I see kw and kg on there... 🤷

Now latest testing of an even lighter 12.7kg version on a more powerful dynamometer has shattered this record, with a staggering 750kW (>1000bhp) short-term peak rating, resulting in a new unofficial power density record of 59kW/kg

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

28 pounds = 12.7kg, for those wondering.

[–] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

But, how much is that in baby elephants?

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Roughly a tenth of a baby elephant, or around two round trips of your neurons on a single line reaching the moon

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Bro got that galaxy brain. Average is about 1.4 kgs, or roughly .5% of a giraffe for you standard pedants.

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

It's the lead I eat every day. Helps keep my brain heavy and smooth

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 116 points 2 days ago (39 children)

Lol:

The new YASA axial flux motor weighs just 28 pounds, or about the same as a small dog.

However, it delivers a jaw-dropping 750 kilowatts of power, which is the equivalent of 1,005 horsepower.

I feel like we'd need peak horsepower output of a small dog to truly understand this.

[–] DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works 64 points 2 days ago (5 children)

If it's a Corgi, I would estimate the power output at .1 horsepower max. But if it's a small dog the size of a large dog, then that's something entirely different.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 76 points 2 days ago (10 children)

Had an ex-friend who was a motorhead arguing that electric motors will never beat ICE because they lack comparable torque. Look, I'm no mechanic, but I never got my head around that.

"You mean they don't have enough torque to run a US destroyer?! Someone should call the Navy."

Seriously, if you've played with even a tiny electric motor, provide DC, it goes, instantly. What could he have possibly been trying to say?

[–] kalkulat@lemmy.world 73 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think he was trying to admit he doesn't know shit about electric motors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What could he have possibly been trying to say?

I mean, the general appeal of ICE engines is the fuel, not the engine. Gasoline is generally more energy dense than lithium.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Nah, his complaint was lack of torque. Very strange, never got it. Figured he was repeating fossil fuel propaganda. But he was a motorhead!

And yes, energy density is the thing no one talks about when raging against fossil fuels. A gallon of refined gasoline packs insane energy. I've run my 5-gallon, crappy Harbor Freight generator all night into the morning, powering the camp, heaters and all, never came close to emptying it. Contrast that with a monster LIPO4 battery that died in 48-hours only powering LED lights. (Gotta admit, something weird happened there.)

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (13 children)

My parents had an original Prius and it was a weedy little car that made those two hippies really happy. If that was his only experience with electric cars I can see why he’d think that.

But the new ones are fucking rockets. I just don’t understand why they need all that. Can they make a cheaper one that’s got 300 horsepower?

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] BilSabab@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

cant wait for corporations to crush the competition with some bullshit yet again and then complain that we're at peak EV tech anyway

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 29 points 2 days ago (30 children)

This looks small enough to be installed within the wheel hub itself. Imagine a car with four motors, one inside each wheel. The entire floor pan could just be one thin battery, and everything above it could be passenger and storage space.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

That's how EVs started! Sorta.

This is from a Porsche in 1900:

in hub motor

old porsche hybrid

And some 2000s EVs tried it. But it's impractical.

  • It increases unsprung weight, e.g. weight not cushioned by suspension. Bad for ride/handling/steering feel.

  • All that vibration is HARD on the motor. Read: unreliable.

  • Motor is more exposed to temperature/dust. Again, reliability.

In reality, a decent suspension needs a lot of room under the body anyway. An axle to get the motor in the body is dirt cheap on the rear, and still pretty cheap on the front, and you could just mount this thing sideways to make it flat...

[–] Canopyflyer@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That would be a lot of unsprung weight.

Handling and ride quality are dramatically and negatively impacted by every bit of weight that is not held up by the suspension. That's why higher performance cars will have lightweight wheels. Rather than steel wheels you see on lower performance cars.

It's better to just put all the heavy drive components inboard on the chassis and run drive shafts to the wheels.

You see motors in the hubs of bicycles, because they really don't go that fast. So even if the bike has a suspension, it's not that big of a deal. Motorcycles on the other hand would need to keep any heavy parts inboard.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

PS

One issue I hadn’t thought of is putting traditional brakes (which generate a ton of heat) right next to the motors. Again, we're just asking for mechanical issues here, and we’re ballooning unsprung mass to mitigate it, especially in heavier cars that take a lot to stop.

The entire floor pan could just be one thin battery, and everything above it could be passenger and storage space.

This seems like a minor thing, but the control electronics for the motors takes up a nontrivial amount of space. So do “traditional” subsystems like hydraulics, climate control, or an old fashioned car battery (which often exists in parallel to the EV drivetrain).

Theres also safety to consider. A traditional sedan “hood,” even a small one, is easier on standing pedestrians, so it hits their legs and they flop on top, instead of slamming them like a wall (as a bus-like front would).

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 10 points 2 days ago (4 children)

The size is less of an issue than the power usage.

Does it also use 1000% more power to get that strength?

The only real benefit in that case would be robot mech suits.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Naz@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

My eScooter weighs 42 pounds.

A 28 pound motor that's 750 kW?

Holy fuck.

That's power density straight out of science fiction

[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Ebike would probably fold in half from the torque lol

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] solrize@lemmy.ml 26 points 2 days ago (9 children)

1000 hp = 0.75 MW. If 98% efficient that's 15KW of heat dissipation Sounds like a subsystem bigger than the motor.

[–] pokexpert30@jlai.lu 3 points 20 hours ago

I mean an ICE output more heat than power. So a 150kW ice engine requires like, 200kW heat dissipation ?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (15 children)

Ah good thing the batteries are not the heavy part of the system otherwise this would be awkward.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›