-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Space X Option Package
- Thread starter McManX
- Start date
>> What about heating the expanding air with resistive heating?
It is not worth it beyond removing/preventing the ice buildup blocking the thrusters.
Stop looking at thrusters as naive rocket-like operation, directly pushing the car forward.
Much more can be gained if these thrusters provide more grip of tires that already have COG higher than 1.
This COG being > 1 means that each pound of thrust pushing the tire at the tarmac result in more than one pound of force the tire "pushes" at the car.
While accelerating one fires the thrusters in the front of the car facing the sky. This provides additional down-force in-front resulting in much higher down-force on the rear axis. Double digit multiplication factor.
Same thing during cornering - one fires the thrusters on the inside facing sky and thus provides for much (multiples) more grip.
And same during braking - one fires the rear thrusters facing up to again provide much more grip on the front tires.
As long as tires have COG above 1 the best direction of firing thrusters is up and as far away from car-tilting-axes as possible.
When tire COG drops below 1 (dirty tarmac, gravel, etc) the best option is to fire thrusters in direction of desired acceleration.
Now, when would one want the car to fly? Not sure abut this. What goes up must come down. How to do this while not making things worse I am not able to see.
It is not worth it beyond removing/preventing the ice buildup blocking the thrusters.
Stop looking at thrusters as naive rocket-like operation, directly pushing the car forward.
Much more can be gained if these thrusters provide more grip of tires that already have COG higher than 1.
This COG being > 1 means that each pound of thrust pushing the tire at the tarmac result in more than one pound of force the tire "pushes" at the car.
While accelerating one fires the thrusters in the front of the car facing the sky. This provides additional down-force in-front resulting in much higher down-force on the rear axis. Double digit multiplication factor.
Same thing during cornering - one fires the thrusters on the inside facing sky and thus provides for much (multiples) more grip.
And same during braking - one fires the rear thrusters facing up to again provide much more grip on the front tires.
As long as tires have COG above 1 the best direction of firing thrusters is up and as far away from car-tilting-axes as possible.
When tire COG drops below 1 (dirty tarmac, gravel, etc) the best option is to fire thrusters in direction of desired acceleration.
Now, when would one want the car to fly? Not sure abut this. What goes up must come down. How to do this while not making things worse I am not able to see.
I wish he would sort my Model S sat nav out - I am fed up of it telling me to pull into a layby and out 300 yards later - should be simple for a man who can make cars like this but he seems unable to crack it. I saw a thing on youtube with a ladybird following a line drawn on a toilet bowl - perhaps he should ask the Ladybirds for help with this seemingly HUGE problem? MORE focus LESS dreaming please Elon!!
Elon Musk on Twitter
Right from the horses mouth. This will be too loud to use in populated areas. So what's the point then?
Right from the horses mouth. This will be too loud to use in populated areas. So what's the point then?
For track use of course. Just like the 0-60 time is too fast for populated areas.
Non populated areas
Salt flats
The track
Emergency braking
Just plain cool
Actual quote "Not recommended for urban environments", same thing is true for semi compression brakes. (South Park biker episode?)
Heck Ford just put a good neighbor mode on the Mustang due to its deliberately loud starting routine.
So when a company, whose stated goal is the widespread adoption of affordable EVs, is struggling to survive, is spending on improving supercar performance on a track (situation where the car will spend a fraction of a percentage of its time) the wisest way to spend money?
All situations which fail to make the case for why this is the right thing for tesla to be spending on right now.
Who said they are spending money on it now. It is plane for 2+ years out.
But spending money on expensive high profit cars is what is making them successful.
Sort of like what Gen3 said... I take it to mean that small rocket/jet nozzles would fire up and push down on the car so that the tires have more traction than normal (more than 1G downforce) so the motor can put more power through the wheels without having the tires break traction. In other words you could accelerate quicker without spinning the tires. 0-60 in 1.9 is really pushing the limits of adhesion / traction for street legal tires, so they are resorting to some "bend the rules of physics" trickery to get more traction to extract more acceleration performance.
Normally tires are pushed into the ground by 1 force of gravity... So having something push down on the car would help to get more than 1G traction from the tires.
Some race vehicles used fans to suck air from under the car to create a vacuum that pulls down to get the same effect.
Lots of race cars have wings and such to generate more downforce at higher speeds. Some kind of fans or jets would have the benefit of adding traction off the line and at low speeds.
Last edited:
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
You keep saying this.
Gross margins for supercars are well above 30%, highly profitable
Gross margins for the regular Model 3 are lower.
Spending money on supercar performance for the track pays back quicker with less effort and subsidizes the Model 3 with shortrange battery and Model Y with short range battery that I want to buy. It's a win win situation and absolutely what Tesla should be doing.
Just like every 85/90/100 Model S and 90/100 Model X paved the way for the long range Model 3 now, every 100 S/X and every 2020 roadster with or without gas thrusters will pave the way for cheaper Model 3 and cheaper Model Y in the future.
Model S M.D.
Ludicrous Radiologist
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Everyday Astronaut has a good discussion about this new "rocket thruster" tech:
He estimates (very rough) a 1.4 s 0-60 is achievable and that this could cost upwards of 100K+
He estimates (very rough) a 1.4 s 0-60 is achievable and that this could cost upwards of 100K+
Similar threads
