Has someone actually measured that tradeoff (weight versus regenerative braking) to determine where it is an even tradeoff? And surely regenerative braking has its own shedding of particles from all the moving parts.
Though this is contraindicated by Tesla drivers in the extreme Regen mode that induce motion sickness in their passengers and / or are replacing their tires very often (though conflated with rapid acceleration)
About 140k miles in and I've replaced the pads+rotors once (but will replace next summer)
It adds tire wear, but no more than traditional friction braking. I can't see how there would be any measurable wear from any other moving parts, since it's just using a magnetic field for resistance. There are moving parts that touch, but modern, sealed bearings last a ridiculously long time.
Also, none of these discussions use up-to-date information on EV tires. Consumers aren't willing to replace their tires much more often for an EV except at the high end of the market, tire manufacturers are already making tires last much longer for EV purposes. New designs are already shedding less dust per unit mass of the vehicle than they were a few years ago.
Plus, some manufacturers are now working to reduce the toxicity of their formulas. This will eliminate the issues a lot more.
Absent any evidence, I don't believe that claim. Unless you're skidding, I don't see how braking slowly and smoothly over a longer period causes any less tire wear than braking more rapidly for a shorter time.
Additionally, since this is intrinsically tied to EVs, they weigh more and thus increase tire wear in all conditions.
It seems believable that hard braking, even without leaving skid marks, could pull more rubber off a tire than gradual braking.
Hard Braking: Less experienced drivers often react late to situations, slamming on the brakes instead of slowing down gradually. This creates more friction and heat, reducing pad lifespan.
Acceleration and deceleration is calculated the same way: m/s^2. If you decelerate faster you put more stress on the system in a non-linear way - the square of it actually. This is why sport and race cars have huge brakes. The tire friction will also augment non-linearly - it will hold a certain acceleration and then quickly give up (slipping point), but the energy has to be transferred and partly absorbed all the time.
> they weigh more and thus increase tire wear in all conditions
Then get a lighter one if that is your concern. Defaulting to ICE is the wrong idea because they have much more externalities (like one ton of fuel per year that needs actually around 1.5 if you include the extraction and transport).
Part of the problem is the instant torque, but the narrow geometry is a bigger issue. Also, they did something to the formulation that achieves less rolling resistance for increased wear.
I also don’t think the weight is the main issue. The i3 is a bit under 3000 lbs. That’s the same as a Volvo station wagon, and they didn’t have this problem. (If I remember right, you could get 50K mile Michelins for them.)
From https://mechanicswizard.com/how-close-should-brake-pads-be-t...:
> Typically, the optimal gap between brake pads and rotors is between 0.5 and 1.5 mm (0.020 to 0.060 inches).
Drum brakes by contrast have springs that retract the pads from the braking surface, so the OP has a very valid point.
The wobble pushes the pads back in, right?
I mean you can hear scratching when the pistons get crusty and the don't retract like they are supposed to.
It’s even easier to see on a bicycle with hydraulic discs.
There are clips you can buy to force the calipers apart. I wonder if this negatively affects safety though.
We only ever really went to disc brakes because they were slightly cheaper and easier to manufacture and since racing vehicles used disc brakes (because they benefit from the extra cooling capacity that commuters don't need) it was easy to convince customers that they were "better" and they became standard.
There was also a time when they didn't figure out traction control very well using brake drums while they did manage it with brake discs, but part of that could be just because brake drums were out of fashion in racing where traction and stability control were invented and implemented first and nobody bothered improving drum brakes to take advantage of that tech until decades later.
Now that EV drivers can go weeks without touching their actual brakes and just rely on regen braking, disc brakes have become a liability since they aren't worn down smooth and cleaned whenever someone stops at the end of their driveway.
That does wear off the rust.
I don't think any EV that I've heard of has full-range electric brakes.
There are two interesting kinds of things that I think EVs could use...
brake resistors - if the battery can't absorb the full power of regenerative braking, maybe giant resistors can take the dissipate the rest of the energy.
eddy currents - it might be cool to use eddy currents to brake.
"Brake Disc Drying"
https://www.reddit.com/r/eGolf/comments/dhll01/egolf_brake_d...
https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782553
You probably want your disk brakes to get nice and hot every once in a while.
The only recent cars I've had with drum brakes used them for the parking brake. They tended to corrode and not work well. Also, as an emergency brake even with a pedal you could push hard on, they were beyond terrible, even dangerously ineffective.
My cheap Chinese Walmart tires have lasted me 50k miles and are due to be replaced soon, but I spend zero attention to driving smoothly or in an eco mindset.
The same problem occurs if you let an ICE car sit unused for a while.