[throw0u1t]

Toyota have traditionally built their reputation of quality by conservativly adopting new technology, especially when it comes to drivetrains.

I'm not aware of any Toyota vehicles sold in the U.K that have a turbocharger, except the Supra which shares the drivetrain, suspension, platform and some interior with the BMW Z4.

Heck, their Yaris GRMN uses the 1.8 supercharged engine that Toyota have been selling to Lotus for years.

I wonder how Toyota plan to transfer this to electric vehicles given how new the technology still is.

[ed_balls]

Prius drivetrain is quite complicated.

> that have a turbocharger,

It's not only Toyota. I think this is an instance of you get what you measure. European car automakers jump into turbocharged engines, because it was easy to meet NDEC. Now WLTP makes it a way harder, hence mild hybridization.

[sremani]

I am bit thinking out loud, drive train becomes important if its a plug-in hybrid when you have to change from electric to gas (and vice-versa), but in electric it is meant to be simple, is drive train even an issue of innovation in Electric cars, after all there is only Drive and Reverse.

[throw0u1t]

I would presume electric drive trains are quite complex.

You'd have independent electric motors on at least 2, perhaps all 4 wheels. You have to redesign entire platforms to fit batteries, ensure the batteries and the drivetrain have adequate cooling, ensure that the electric motors have a certain amount of longevity, and so on.

[andrewmunsell]

With the exception of a few niche vehicles, most EVs have only 1 (FWD/RWD) or 2 (AWD) motors. Though it's a new platform, electric motors aren't exactly a new technology and overall it's significantly fewer moving parts to fail. There's also the fact that many manufacturers come up with a single "skateboard" platform for multiple vehicles, which reduces the overall complexity of manufacturing EVs.

[throw0u1t]

As far as I understand the current state of EVs, EVs have eliminated the engine and it's ancillaries.

However, EVs still have CV joints, differentials (dependent on the car, Tesla runs an open differential), independent suspension - all of which must be much stronger since electric motors produce far more torque than ICEs and also have the added weight penalty.

[cptskippy]

The power-train is everything from wheels to engine. Where as drive-train is the power-train minus the engine.

The transmission is the most complicated part of the drive-train and arguably more complicated than all of the other drive-train components combined. In current EVs there is no transmission, just a single reduction gearbox.

In an EV the engine is dramatically simplified compared to an ICE and there are significantly fewer parts and almost no moving parts in comparison.

Another thing to consider is that all internal combustion engines have multiple supplementary systems that are required to function such as cooling, fuel delivery, and ignition. At most an EV motor might require supplementary cooling but no commercial vehicle has one that I'm aware of.

[throw0u1t]

Of course, ICE powertrains have lots of moving parts, but the comparison that EV cars are simple is just not an accurate representation of EV cars.

There are fewer moving parts, I agree. The architecture itself is simpler too, I agree. But the individual components are still massively complex and expensive. High density Lithion-ion is very complex, and also requires a number of supplementary systems to manage power, heat, cooling and monitor the array.

[51lver]

That's all very old and simple tech. The quality is only limited by the bean counters keeping costs down.

[cptskippy]

> I would presume electric drive trains are quite complex.

They're significantly less complicated than an ICE power-train and drive-train.

The Nissan Leaf has a single electric motor and a fixed reduction gear box. The only fluids to maintain are the wiper fluid and reduction gear box fluid, which is similar to automatic transmission fluid but requires less maintenance. The battery pack is air cooled and the only servicing is an annual inspection to maintain warranty.

The Tesla vehicles are all direct drive with no gearbox. They come in single or dual motor options. The batteries are cooled and the fluid is changed at 4 year intervals.

The maintenance schedule for an EV is annually changing the cabin filter, wiper blades, and doing a multi-point inspection.

[magduf]

>The Tesla vehicles are all direct drive with no gearbox.

This is wrong. They have a single electric motor (except the dual-motor ones) and a fixed reduction gear box, just like the Leaf. No one does direct-drive electric motors because it's a lot easier to make a faster-spinning motor and then use a reduction gear to get usable torque from it; a direct-drive motor would have to have a huge diameter.

>The maintenance schedule for an EV is annually changing the cabin filter, wiper blades, and doing a multi-point inspection.

You're forgetting the brakes. EVs still have regular hydraulic brake systems that need new pads and fluid, though not as much because they can use regenerative braking much of the time, avoiding use of the friction brakes, which are really for emergency stops and full stops.

[cptskippy]

> This is wrong.

You're right. I was mistaken, I thought I had read that the Roadster was the only Tesla with a gearbox but that it was eliminated with a free upgrade. There's still a gearbox but it's a fixed single reduction gear.

> You're forgetting the brakes.

I wasn't, I was touching on the differences between an EV and an ICE with regards to maintenance. Brakes are a consumable that are inspected and changed as needed rather than at regular interval like the belts or fluids in an ICE vehicle.

Brakes and brake fluid are part of the multi-point inspection that's done on all vehicles when they're serviced. As you pointed out, EVs use their brakes significantly less than ICE vehicles and so any maintenance of the brake system will be less frequent than an equivalent ICE vehicle.

Overall EVs require significantly less maintenance to their drive/power-train AND to some of their traditional systems (e.g. brakes).

[throw0u1t]

I'd like to refute the point about brakes. A lot of it is based on the driver, not just the vehicle.

I've driven a manual all my life. I don't really enjoy automatics, and I've got to the point now where I've pretty much perfected rev matching and heel and toe so I can engine brake most of the time with minimal wear on my clutch and shock to my drive train.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I wear my brakes any faster than if I drove an electric car. I'd love to do an experiment to see if this was the case, it sounds like as lot of fun!

However, I concede that most drivers are nowhere near as interested in the technicalities of driving and teaching learner drivers to rev match and heel and toe is probably too complex at that stage in their driving careers.

[magduf]

>Brakes are a consumable that are inspected and changed as needed rather than at regular interval like the belts or fluids in an ICE vehicle.

Wrong again. Brake pads and rotors, yes, but brake fluid needs to be bled and changed at regular intervals regardless of usage.

[jki275]

I've seen claims by Tesla that their brakes never need service due to the fact they're barely used. Not sure how accurate that is, but it's sort of logical.

[magduf]

Sounds like BS. Even if you almost never use them, brake fluid has a finite life and needs to be replaced every few years. Brake systems are never perfectly hermetically sealed and brake fluid is hygroscopic.

[loeg]

Electric drivetrains are just so simple compared to ICE that it seems hard to fuck up. I mean, I'm sure Toyota will think about it more than I have, but that's one of the major benefits of this shift towards battery vehicles.

[magduf]

>Electric drivetrains are just so simple compared to ICE that it seems hard to fuck up.

You would think so, but Tesla had a lot of problems with their electric motors and had to replace lots of them.

[loeg]

Tesla is in an interesting position where they have a lot of apologists for various kinds of problems that no other automaker gets. I don't think their experience is necessarily indicative of how an entranched, reliable automaker's EV experience will shake out.

[magduf]

Perhaps, but it's not like there's a lot of other examples of battery EVs out there to compare with, just the Leaf and the Bolt really. There's also the motors in the Volt and Prius (which are both capable of running motor-only, and for the Volt the motor provides all the propulsion). But you have a point, none of those others have had any motor problems I've heard of. Thought to be fair, the Tesla motors are a lot more powerful than those in any of those other cars.

[cptskippy]

EVs are dramatically simplified in comparison to ICE vehicles and thus the power-train is much more reliable. For any automaker this increased reliability is only going to help their reputation.

This poses a problem for Toyota and others (e.g. Honda) who are known for having very reliable power-trains, not because their reliability will suffer but rather because other automaker's power-trains will get significantly better. That is assuming those other automakers don't find a way to screw up, I have no doubt some will.

[throw0u1t]

I'm concerned like this a quite a blanket statement. Are all EVs that much simpler? There are simple EV drivetrains and there are complex EV drivetrains. Not all EV drivetrains are the same.

This also applies to ICE. Most ICE drivetrains that do not have forced induction tend to be quite simple. Forced induction makes the drivetrain much more complex and puts a lot more strain on the drivetrain, and is one of the reasons why Toyota has stayed away from forced induction.

Is the drive train in a Tesla Model X P100d much simpler than that in a 1.5 NA Yaris? I'm not sure, and would love to be proved incorrect on this.

[cptskippy]

> Are all EVs that much simpler?

Yes.

Internal Combustion Engines have at a minimum a Combustion System, Ignition System, Fuel Delivery System, Exhaust System, and a Cooling System. These can vary in complexity but, apart from air cooling, any one of those systems will be more complex than an EV's electric power-train. On top of that, most of the parts of an ICE are mechanical moving parts where as most of the parts of an electric motor are stationary non-moving parts.

ICE vehicles almost universally have a transmission gear box that contains a configurable gear system to alter the gear ratio of the vehicle. All EVs on the market use a fixed gear box with a single reduction gear set.

> Is the drive train in a Tesla Model X P100d much simpler than that in a 1.5 NA Yaris?

Yes, dramatically.

[loeg]

Where are the complex EV drivetrains? It isn't remotely the same thing as ICE. Even the most reliable ICE drivetrains are extremely complex. Toyota just uses conservative and overbuilt ICE technology to achieve remarkable reliability. That's fine, but still has tons of moving parts compared to electric drivetrains.