[kube-system]

Probably just fine. It seems they intend this mostly for use on soft surfaces, where the lack of a differential isn't really an issue, even on large vehicles, because the surface itself is compliant enough to make up for the lack of differential action.

But even on a hard surface it might work just fine, because the turning radius looks pretty shallow.

The advantage is that a solid axle is simple, cheap, reliable, and performs well in low-traction situations.

[woriuweflksdncn]

I mostly agree about the advantages, but two motors would be arguably simpler from a mechanical standpoint.

[eemil]

One drawback that I haven't seen mentioned yet, is single-wheel torque. If you look at the video, there is a pretty sizeable motor that's even geared down with a sprocket an chain. So there is a lot of torque and power available, and due to the solid axle, you can send it to a single wheel. This might be important in off-roading situations.

With direct drive motors, you have to make a pretty big compromise somewhere:

* Two smaller motors (same total power): drastically less torque per wheel

* Two larger motors (>2x total power): somewhat less torque per wheel (still don't have gearing!), cost, weight

If you're adamant on avoiding the solid axle, I think a good-ish solution might be hub motors on all four corners. That way you're far less likely to depend on a single wheel to get you moving.

Or alternatively, a locking diff in the rear (forget about LSDs). They usually provide some gear reduction, so you can skip the chain and drive it directly with the electric motor.

In short, the solid axle is a really good choice that you would be hard pressed to replace, without making a sizeable compromise somewhere.

[ansible]

Yes, I might have gone for two smaller hub motors, rather than a solid rear axle. But maybe they tried that too.

[kube-system]

Then you have two motors instead of one, and either need an ESC that handles two motors or an additional ESC, and then electronics/software to make sure they work in tandem.

[woriuweflksdncn]

Yes, I agree. I was careful to say from a mechanical standpoint.

[jacquesm]

But far more expensive. Likely the motor - possibly the batteries - is the most expensive part of the design.

[woriuweflksdncn]

Perhaps, but I don't think it would be impractical for something that's nearly $5,000 already. You would likely spec two smaller, cheaper motors; altogether it would cost more, but not as much as two of the motors it has now.