Look under any RWD IRS passenger vehicle and you’ll find nearly every single example uses CV axles, not u-joints. U-joints have famously irregular speed variation as the angles change in steady rotation, so the constant velocity joint is far more common for the half axles

I don’t know what’s more appalling, the number of antivax nurses or the number of people who reference their antivax nurse friends as authoritative sources. They are not doctors. They are not pathologisists. They are not immunologists, biologists, chemists, neurologists, or any other relevant ologists you can think of.

I don’t trust the Jiffy Lube oil change tech to diagnose my car’s power loss, but I guarantee they’ll have some anecdotal ideas because they “hear” about things all the time. I don’t trust an experienced mechanic to give a proper statement on reliability, either, because a mechanic will only see cars when they’re broken, biasing the sample.

So how do nurses become the voice of fact on this? I mean, I know why. It’s confirmation bias. This is more me screaming into the void, fuckin why?

How do you figure dual front motors would alleviate any of what you said a front diff would need? Dual front motors will still be rigidly mounted to the chassis, requiring flexible couplings. The rear is also independent, requiring the same flexible couplings whether it’s a diff or motors. CV axles all around. Non-steer wheels still have vertical travel from the suspension.