I think in time we see a similar trend with EVs. They are, by many metrics, vastly less complicated in terms of hardware. Software, of course, is another matter.
You think that software isn't complex because you've never seen it.
What should it do when the throttle pedal goes from 0 to 99 percent? That's likely an electrical issue, not a driver command to plow through the school zone. I could probably think of a dozen such scenarios, and the true number is probably in the hundreds. They all have to be proofed mathematically. With redundancy.
There is fundamentally no difference between a golf car and an electric car other than a higher top speed and more powerful motor.
> What should it do when the throttle pedal goes from 0 to 99 percent?
How fast? 0->99% in 1 second is likely the user gunning it. 0 to 99 percent in a millisecond is likely a fault. In either case, the simplest solution is a capacitor in-between the signal and throttle. Doesn't need to be particularly beefy to get the job done.
The problem is you are thinking about this as a software problem when it's an electrical problem. There are a lot of electrical components that have instantaneous response times, well known curves, and perform exactly the jobs you'd want faster than what you can do with software.
You want to minimize the amount of software between the accelerator and the motor precisely because you want to make the car as responsive as possible. Putting software in the middle creates delays and needs for very complex real time software and more expensive components.
But an EV has instant torque; going 0-99% in one second is probably unwise and not fixed by a capacitor. Software's what helps us not strip the rubber off the tires, or mitigates a slipping wheel on ice. It's a lot more than a capacitor at work.
The gas pedal on an EV isn't connected to a passive rheostat gating the entire power output of the vehicle.
It's a low-voltage sensor. A capacitor can swallow a transient of a 0.1v signal bursting to 5v for ten milliseconds, and then software converts it into whatever "sport mode acceleration curve" the marketing department calls for.
> There is fundamentally no difference between a golf car and an electric car other than a higher top speed and more powerful motor.
That's the most willfully ignorant statement I've seen all week. It's like stating that there's fundamentally no difference between a giant squid and a fruit fly, because both consume organic matter and can propel themselves. Probably the only interchangeable part between the golf cart and the electron electric car is the tire valve stem cover. And most everything else operates on completely different principles, even if superficially they look similar.
Tell me, what's the different principles that an BEV motor uses and a golf cart motor?
What's the fundamentally different principle that the battery operates on?
Rather than just say "nuh uh". Educate me and other commenters on where the differences lay.
Because honestly, I think you're the ignorant one. You think because they are a different shape they have different operating principles.
There are differences, obviously, a golf carts doesn't need airbags, HVAC, or crumple zones. However, when it comes to the drive train, about the only fundamental difference is that BEVs have bigger motors and bigger batteries.
There's a reason average people have been able to convert their ICE vehicles into BEVs. It's that the most complex part is storing the batteries and attaching the motor.
Are they actually proving correctness in the auto industry as a matter of course? My understand (could be out of date) was that there were a few partnerships with universities for a small part of the stack.
That's a wild statement from someone who has never built a commercial ev. Like all industrial hardware, the portion protecting from what shouldn't happen is twice as complex as the section regarding what should be happening.
There are certainly safety devices that I elided over. For example, checking the battery temperature is pretty crucial.
But, my argument is that EVs aren't complex. I could even grant your 2x number for safety measure and you'd still end up with a much simpler device than you can pull off with a comparable ICE engine.
I'd also point out that a lot of the parts are already "off the shelf".
There's a reason we saw a slew of pop-up BEV manufacturers all at once. It's because the manufacturing complexity is simply a lot lower than it is for an ICE line. There are far fewer parts, far less complex parts, and the parts are more readily available.
