A comparison between an electric VS ICE 'trucks', highway van towing trip. American.

[jaahn]

Here is a direct comparison between, two huge new American utes, towing the same 6000 lb (2700kg)van. A Ford electric and a GM 6.2L petrol. Driving down the highway at the speed limit. Lots of BS talked as usual with yanks and their trucks. Sorry adds too.
Interesting result.

Jaahn

 

[Greenpeace]

Mmm, easy solved, just tow a 6000lb aerodynamically designed battery instead of the trailer.

 

[Russell Hall]

During the 1920's trucks and tractors were pitted against horses in working competitions. There were cases where the horse came out in front. But mostly not.

 

[DoubleChevron]

Its no surprise. We aren't there yet. Until we can "hot swap" battery packs, they are limited to passenger car use really. There is a reason why there isn't electric machinery/trucks/busses ... unless they have a way of charging while they are in transit.

 

[PeterT]

unless they have a way of charging while they are in transit.

Auxiliary diesel generator? I know, we've now made a diesel/electric train.

 

[Greenpeace]

I did the math on this comparison and looked up the fuel consumption of a Chevrolet Duromax turbo diesel towing the same size/weight trailer. Based on what the guy paid to charge to 75% and calculating on the diesel price observed in the above video. The charging cost (at charging stations) exceeds what it would cost in diesel for a Duramax to do the same job. Additionally the diesel would have triple the range prior to needing to be refueled.

 

[Fingers]

Auxiliary diesel generator? I know, we've now made a diesel/electric train.

I actually think that is probably the way to go, short term at least.
Small diesel running at peak torque/efficiency when required charging the battery pack that feeds the electric traction motors at each wheel.

 

[DoubleChevron]

I actually think that is probably the way to go, short term at least.
Small diesel running at peak torque/efficiency when required charging the battery pack that feeds the electric traction motors at each wheel.

that would be less efficient than using the diesel motor drive the car

 

[Kim Luck]

I did the math on this comparison and looked up the fuel consumption of a Chevrolet Duromax turbo diesel towing the same size/weight trailer. Based on what the guy paid to charge to 75% and calculating on the diesel price observed in the above video. The charging cost (at charging stations) exceeds what it would cost in diesel for a Duramax to do the same job. Additionally the diesel would have triple the range prior to needing to be refueled.

I'm old and tired. Please share those maths with us and then tell us the recharging fees are standard across 'Merica and the world. P.S: Please also tell us how many Aussies tow a Caravan 3.657 Metres high with the aerodynamics of a giant brick?

 

[Greenpeace]

I'm old and tired. Please share those maths with us and then tell us the recharging fees are standard across 'Merica and the world.

I haven't claimed the charging cost Is standardised, hence the notation "based on what the guy paid to charge to 75% and calculating on the diesel price observed in the video".

It was merely an exercise in shooting down the cost effectiveness of an EV I would have introduced "based on the price of gasoline in Venezuela". (It's currently 2.2 US cents per litre to save anyone having to look it up).

The Duromax owners are citing 17 to 18 mpg towing a similar sized trailer in similar or more challenging conditions. That's double the mpg that the V8 petrol got on the original video.
The guy put $93 of premium unleaded in it, half that is $46.50, and on top of that the diesel price in the video (on the billboard in the background) was 3% cheaper than the premium unleaded. You can calculate the premium price from where it shows on the pump how much he paid divided by how many gallons he put in it.
So $46.50 - 3% is $45.11.

The F150 guy paid $27 for 75% charge, assuming he actually got home on that ( after dumping the trailer halfway) it would be reasonable to assume the battery would be dead flat by the time he got there. If 75% charge costs $27, let's be generous and say that 100% charge will cost $36. That comes to $63. That's more than $45.11.
Of course a home charge won't cost as much, but then you can't take the home charging station with you on a long trip (75 miles ) either.

 

[Greenpeace]

Please also tell us how many Aussies tow a Caravan 3.657 Metres high with the aerodynamics of a giant brick?

I can't speak for what people do with their trucks and SUVs in Toorak, but I live in the countryside.
Everyone I know with a large ute or SUV tows either a large caravan, race car trailer, tandem car trailer, large boat, double or triple horse float, one friend breeds (and competes) show jumping horses, their custom built 5th wheeler (that they tow with a Dodge Ram) holds 4 horses and has accommodation for four adults, it makes the ones in the OP's video look like a dog trailer. Out here the towing capacity actually means something to prospective buyers of such vehicles. They can all tell you the exact load rating, towing capacity and towball rating of their vehicles because it was part of the decision making process prior to purchase.

 

[Kim Luck]

I can't speak for what people do with their trucks and SUVs in Toorak, but I live in the countryside.
Everyone I know with a large ute or SUV tows either a large caravan, race car trailer, tandem car trailer, large boat, double or triple horse float, one friend breeds (and competes) show jumping horses, their custom built 5th wheeler (that they tow with a Dodge Ram) holds 4 horses and has accommodation for four adults, it makes the ones in the OP's video look like a dog trailer. Out here the towing capacity actually means something to prospective buyers of such vehicles. They can all tell you the exact load rating, towing capacity and towball rating of their vehicles because it was part of the decision making process prior to purchase.

And like everyone else, I've never seen a cocky with an overloaded vehicle or trailer in my life!

 

[Whippet]

Hi.

I am not sure what the point of this thread is.

For the people that don't like how their world is changing in response to the changing world we live in, and want to hang on to their current paradigm with all of their might, then it achieves a feel good BEV's are shit, let’s have a laugh together, outcome.

Physics tells us that currently the energy density of hydrocarbons is much higher than electricity in batteries. So the outcome of the range test "comparison" was very predictable.

Unless there is a technology step change in electricity energy storage densities, then if a vehicle user needs to tow heavy loads longer distances, they will need to use a vehicle with an internal combustion engine (ICE) and hydrocarbon fuel. In future years that might involve much higher fuel costs than it does now.

If however the use of a F150 "truck" was for shorter distances that did not involve towing heavy loads at highway speeds, the cost of ownership of a "truck" might compare favourably to an ICE alternative. My gut instinct is that both sides of this financial equation will only improve in favour of the BEV option.

I can't see how #traction vehicles will be able to transition to battery stored electricity in the short term, and in my mind, even if there is a step change in electricity energy storage densities, this still won't occur.

For me the point is this. There are millions of opportunities in Australia for two car families to have one BEV using rooftop PV to power their daily commute, with associated cost savings. If they need to travel across the country to visit old Aunt Agnes, then they can take the ICE, or hybrid BEV/ICE vehicle, for the range and towing capacity. This alone will free up large quantities of imported hydrocarbon fuels for traction applications. And reduce air pollution in cities.

I do consider that urban bus fleets could easily transition to battery/electric motors, as they could more easily be charged at depots, with dedicated high capacity chargers.

As Shane has suggested, I also think that there needs to be quick swap modular battery packs for some heavy vehicle applications, to overcome charging times. This might make a difference for traction vehicles, I'm not sure.

One more thought, I am not sure how a rural property or mining site would have the kW supply available to recharge large batteries in utes, tractors and trucks concurrently. So for the time being these will need to remain ICE.

My own thinking is that long distance heavy freight should be carried by rail, with much cleverer tracking, local unloading and final distribution of goods to customers. The local distribution could be by BEV light/medium trucks. It frustrates me that the trucking industry has become the main long distance mover of goods instead of rail.

#Tractors, trucks, earthmoving equipment etc

Cheers

 

[Russell Hall]

Preaching to the choir on rail. Victorian Railways was once one of the great rail networks of the world. Both political parties contributed to its decline. A sad shadow of what once was. In 1954 at the Centenary Victoria had around 1200 locomotives. Pathetic National has fewer than 20. You had to be careful not to be on the line when the Fast Goods on passenger bougies thundered through. Now some of the grain trains travel slower than Stephenson's Rocket did on Stockton to Darlington. This state was developed by rail. Commissioner Harold Clapp was one of the great rail men of the world in the 1920's. But now running and maintaining the remnants of rail seems beyond our present companies.
Saw a short clip of a Chinese fast train speeding through a station. A different century.

 

[Greenpeace]

And like everyone else, I've never seen a cocky with an overloaded vehicle or trailer in my life!

Yes but the original video in not about overloading, it is about how the vehicles perform doing what they were designed to do.
At the end of the day the EV on test sucked due to its limited range.
No-one has commented on how the comparison was unfair, because it wasn't.
The video has been posted elsewhere. The only comments put up in the EVs defence have been "how many will people actually use their truck to tow a big load anyway"? That's in the same league as defending a vehicle with faulty airbags by saying " how many people are going to actually crash their car anyway"?

I used to deliver 26' to 30' raised roof caravans from Melbourne to Brisbane in 16 to 17 hrs, taking the Newell Hwy, towing with an old V8 Valiant sedan, including 3 refueling stops.
The EV F150 would need around 15 stops to complete the same journey towing a large caravan assuming it was recharged to 100% each time and that there were charging stations conveniently placed at 120kms apart. The time required to 100% charge is the great unknown, Ford only quote a "from 15% to 80%" time of 41 minutes for the extended range on a 150kW charger. The guy on the video stated the last 20% of charge is "a lot slower" to deliver.
If we were generous and said it could charge to 100% in 60 minutes (from the 6% or so it was down to on the video) the EV vehicle is going to be spending 15 hours just recharging for the same Melboure to Brisbane route.

For truck with a 10,000 lb towing capacity it makes a great city car.

 

[Russell Hall]

Sounds like the old coaching stations. You had to recharge every 20 k's or so.

 

[Russell Hall]

People will work things out for themselves. There are 7 billion people in the world, 450 million in the EU, around two thirds of the population of Europe, so I'm sure everyone will watch with interest how things work out there. And make decisions based upon their own national interests. Governments are poor pickers of technological winners so this is something best left to the markets.

 

[Greenpeace]

Hi.

I am not sure what the point of this thread is.

For the people that don't like how their world is changing in response to the changing world we live in, and want to hang on to their current paradigm with all of their might, then it achieves a feel good BEV's are shit, let’s have a laugh together, outcome.

I love my F trucks, I wanted the EV F150 to be victorious. But I also get frustrated with people that are so in love with BEV tech that they are blinded to its shortfalls and will go to any length to defend it.
The crap range doesn't matter "because no-one is going to use it as a truck"?
Really?


"So the outcome of the range test "comparison" was very predictable".

The guys in the video certainly didn't predict how bad it was going to be. They had to change their route to accommodate the rapidly depleting battery.

 

[Whippet]

Hi.

I love my wife, children and grandchildren, not my vehicles. I use vehicles for a purpose and sometimes get satisfaction if they are a nice driving experience. But that is me, others can do as they want.

I am not in love with BEV, but I am very pragmatic and also interested in keeping my cash in my pocket. I can see increasing pressure on the running costs of ICE vehicles into the future. At the moment BEV are the only viable alternatives to ICE. Hence my interest.

My reading, research and interest informs me that for most commuters, BEV can reduce their "fuel" cost per km to almost nothing, compared to ICE.

But for people that need to drive long distances, and/or tow heavy loads, they will need to remain with ICE.

As I said in post #13 range is very dependent on energy density. At the moment hydrocarbons trump electricity. That is why the EV F150 was never going to win a long range towing contest.

I believe that the transition to BEV is inevitable, we have enjoyed 100+ years of relatively low cost and convenient travel with hydrocarbon energy, and my personal opinion is that this is coming to an end. I also believe that we are in a transition period from ICE to BEV that will last ten to fifteen years or so. There are many challenges for BEV tech that are very apparent, availability, purchase price, fast recharge options for regional/rural and intercity travel, recharge options at work/parking etc.

Cheers.

 

[Kim Luck]

Yes but the original video in not about overloading, it is about how the vehicles perform doing what they were designed to do.
At the end of the day the EV on test sucked due to its limited range.
No-one has commented on how the comparison was unfair, because it wasn't.
The video has been posted elsewhere. The only comments put up in the EVs defence have been "how many will people actually use their truck to tow a big load anyway"? That's in the same league as defending a vehicle with faulty airbags by saying " how many people are going to actually crash their car anyway"?

I used to deliver 26' to 30' raised roof caravans from Melbourne to Brisbane in 16 to 17 hrs, taking the Newell Hwy, towing with an old V8 Valiant sedan, including 3 refueling stops.
The EV F150 would need around 15 stops to complete the same journey towing a large caravan assuming it was recharged to 100% each time and that there were charging stations conveniently placed at 120kms apart. The time required to 100% charge is the great unknown, Ford only quote a "from 15% to 80%" time of 41 minutes for the extended range on a 150kW charger. The guy on the video stated the last 20% of charge is "a lot slower" to deliver.
If we were generous and said it could charge to 100% in 60 minutes (from the 6% or so it was down to on the video) the EV vehicle is going to be spending 15 hours just recharging for the same Melboure to Brisbane route.

For truck with a 10,000 lb towing capacity it makes a great city car.

10,000lbs or about (4500 kg) is a load that should be carried on what is called a truck, not dragged behind a a fat arsed utility pretending to be one that can tow that weight but not carry it.