Tri Motor versus Quad Motor design

[MagnusMako]

So Rivian went with a quad motor for the R1T truck where as Tesla is going with a triple motor setup in their top trim (two in the rear, one in the front). I figure that with the quad, the R1T will have better torque control to all the wheels, allowing things such as tank turn and better abilities off road. But I also imagine that Tesla choosing 3 was the most practical choice as it probably provides the best balance between weight savings for range and power / control.

Am curious what the advantages and trade-offs that other people might know about or what your thoughts are on Tesla's decision here.

 

[FlyinLow]

Proven and tested technology with many miles on it by then. Raven MS will prove out the issues, I bet it is a similar set up in the CyberTruck.

I'm sure Rivian is doing testing, but they don't have a bunch of production vehicles in the hands of consumers living with it day to day yet. I hope it turns out as good as the R1T and R1S sound. It will be fantastic to have options.

The CyberTruck is designed to be a work truck, not a fun "adventure vehicle" necessarily. I plan on using my CyberTruck for many adventures, but am glad I can use it for heavy duty hauling, enjoy 35" tires rolling over some rugged terrain and at the end of the day cruise home with a comfortable ride, lots of interior room like a Full Sized truck should.

To me the Rivian seems like the mid-sized truck option which will fill a segment of demand, though I'm not sure how the price will affect its sales.

The $40k base truck will haul six adults and easily tow that boat to the lake, tail gate at the game and haul that pair of motorcycles in the back. This simple space requirement is what I see as the majority of the F-150 and Chevy 1500 drivers I know. The future is bright and stainless.

 

[TIppy]

The two rear motors on the cybertruck could be driven in opposite directions to create a torque around the z-axis. The driven wheels would probably slide sideways through the dirt easier than the front wheels, so it would likely pivot around the front. Since the front has an open differential, they could also apply the brake on the inside wheel.

A MB GL550 I had developed a bad wheel speed sensor. When I would get up to 30mph, the car would slam on the brakes on the opposite side. This caused it to immediately rotate around the braked side. Needless to say, the people in the cars around me were not amused. When I took it in for repair, they checked the vehicle logs and claimed I had been off-roading, which meant the repairs would not be covered by warranty. I was able to eventually convince them that it was the car's hard braking on one side that was being logged.

 

[Zybane]

Tesla went with three motors for the top configuration as it's the entire corporate top tier setup going forward, known as the "Plaid" platform.

 

[TMThree]

3 motor setup with model 3 perm magnet motor in front means the two rears (inductive) can be effectively disabled for highway cruising. It's a very efficient layout.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

So Rivian went with a quad motor for the R1T truck where as Tesla is going with a triple motor setup in their top trim (two in the rear, one in the front). I figure that with the quad, the R1T will have better torque control to all the wheels, allowing things such as tank turn and better abilities off road. But I also imagine that Tesla choosing 3 was the most practical choice as it probably provides the best balance between weight savings for range and power / control.

Am curious what the advantages and trade-offs that other people might know about or what your thoughts are on Tesla's decision here.

Benefits:
- Tesla is already developing a 3-motor system for Plaid and the Roadster.
- blach blah blah