28 pounds = 12.7kg, for those wondering.
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
395 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
76558 readers
2348 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
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.
cant wait for corporations to crush the competition with some bullshit yet again and then complain that we're at peak EV tech anyway
So when are we going to see these in trains?
Trains don't benefit much from lesser weight.
Drones, and planes are the most likely to benefit from this.
Everything but metric.
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.
That's how EVs started! Sorta.
This is from a Porsche in 1900:
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...
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.
Aptera wanted to do this with their flagship Solar Electric Vehicle (SEV).
IIRC, they switched to an outwheel motor because of the weight the inwheel motors added to the wheels. Could be wrong tho
Hub motors are a party trick. They will never reach mass market in a car.
German company DeepDrive has some kinda promising tech. And the ID.Polo seems to be said to have hub motors.
Not even the concept had hub motors.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/volkswagen-id-polo
https://electricarworld.com/volkswagen-polo-makes-a-comeback-as-an-electric-car/
https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/electric-vehicles/volkswagen-id-polo-gti-breaks-cover-at-iaa-mobility-comes-as-reborn-polo-gti-41757316409552.html
Limited slip differential? Can't do that with hub motors. https://www.topgear.com.ph/news/car-news/volkswagen-id-polo-prototype-a5100-20250908
If you have different information about a production car, please share it. The theoretical concept ID.2 R may use hub motors but that is vaporware at this point.
I only have german articles. I only heard it in the video source below, and they sadly don't really say how the normal problems with hub motors would be solved even though they have a section for it in the video.
https://www.electrive.net/2025/06/20/vw-soll-neues-topmodell-id-2-r-mit-radnabenmotoren-erwaegen/
Renault 5 RS Turbo has hub motors, Nostradamus.
mass market
There’ll be 1,980 of these built
That car is the definition of a party trick. You proved my point, so thank you.
Renault 5 RS Turbo
That's because its a limited run show car. Its not meant to be practical.
Imagine on a motorcycle.... Probably nonstop wheely 🤣
They make sense for scooters, bikes, and other low speed or two wheel personal transport. For anything with an actual suspension (designed for a highway) there is just too much competition for space with brakes and suspension linkage. The unsprung weight, exposed high voltage cabling subject to road debris and accidents are problems too. And what to do hub motors really gain you?
Less weight, less parts, 4WD, 4W traction control, more cabin space because no driveshafts.
Simplicity, no transmission. As to unsprung weight, designs like these have a ridiculous power density, so add only very little. Advanced suspensions are active anyway, so just part of the wheel robot.
This is already pretty close to how many EVs are designed.
load more comments
(2 replies)
My eScooter weighs 42 pounds.
A 28 pound motor that's 750 kW?
Holy fuck.
That's power density straight out of science fiction
Ebike would probably fold in half from the torque lol
It only does that at peak for a few seconds, practically, about a third that power.
"YASA" sounds like a mashup between YMCA and NASA. Even their logo looks like the Y's.
YMCA NASA colab would've been lit though
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?
Electric motors don't have a torque curve like ICE, which is why they don't need a transmission. Those massive submarines run on electric motors.
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.
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.)
It is funny because electric motors have nearly unlimited* torque depending on the kind. If you have thick enough power cables and winding conductors, you can just keep pushing it harder to get more torque.
It is like the thing they are very good at, besides sound levels, double or triple the efficiency, low/no maintenance, simpler with less parts, no emissions, etc...
Literally the only good thing about combustion engines are their fuel source energy density.
I think the problem is that motorheads see the enshittification of the auto industry as a whole and just say it's because of electric motors because it happened right about the same time as EVs started coming out and try to push back on the wrong thing.
I think he was trying to admit he doesn't know shit about electric motors.
Tool companies need to nerf electric motors in drills to prevent wrists from breaking.
Dunno, I feel every rev head knew about that evs have no torque curve and plenty of it. The concern to me head always been weight and range when on track. EVs are great in straight line, but have a lot more momentum in corners. They generally have narrower tires as well, which is great for range, but poor for grip
load more comments
(9 replies)
view more: next ›