this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
477 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
76581 readers
2496 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There is a 1000 hp tesla with 3 motors that all together weights about 450 killograms, this seems to support your idea until you look at how much the batteries weigh...
The batteries are 550 kilograms to start, and are generally considered to not be big enough. So yeah, great they solved the issue that no EV had (EVs always had lighter motors, and very heavy batteries).
Edit: The 1000 hp telsa is 2200 Kg total, so yeah this would cut out 400 ish Kgs (assuming cooling and inverter and all that) from the total, not nothing but not really a game changer ether. Also 1000 Hp engine is stupid and not needed, maybe if it was a 200 Hp version but then also that would be diminishing returns as this motor would be what 4 kgs?
Making the motor lighter gives weight allowance for the onboard BESS. This could allow more batteries to be installed on the same car, increasing range and power/torque, so long as the volume of the car allows that same BESS increase.
It's still good progress. I don't understand your POV where we must focus on the BESS first and make that more efficient, both in terms of weight, volume, power, and energy, then move on to other things.
We can do that in parallel and see faster improvements.
~20% weight reduction for a total vehicle weight isn't small change. Plus batteries will continue to improve as well. Do you just get off on being negative?
Yeah, I'm not sure how they concluded in their edit that 400kg is not a lot to shed.
Texas divorce.
The gains compound a bit too, 20 percent less weight equals proportionally less battery capacity required to shift the now-lighter vehicle from point A to point B.
So then you can cut the size of the battery while maintaining the same range, and that's where you start to get significant overall weight and cost savings.
Hell just replace the former motor weight with battery and you've almost doubled the range. If China ever mass produces solid state batteries, double it again.
Put the big battery pack (and maybe an ICE powered generator + fuel) on a trailer for cruising, then have a "ditch trailer and escape" button for that 20 mile sprint at the end of the trip.
Ah, yes. I too enjoy staging my road tripping vehicle like an interplanetary rocket.
Bonus: you can always circle back and pick up the recharge pack, and if you put solar cells on top it can trickle in a (tiny) extra charge when you're away. More practical: plug it into the grid for slow charging of your big batteries while you zip around town in your lightweight configuration.
More boosters!