What’s your ultimate EV?

In reply to Toyman! :

I understand why you want to limit the performance of the truck. Heck, we have internal policies at FM as to when employees are allowed to drive some of the shop cars. I wasn't being sarcastic with that performance limiting pedal, although it would be easier for Ford (or whoever) to do it in the software.

Range is, with all vehicles, a reflection of how the vehicle is operated. If you do 4 second runs to 60 every chance you get, of course it's going to affect your range. But what I'm saying is that the ability of the truck to do that does not mean you have less range unless you use it. If your EV service truck can tow 9k lbs (or whatever) it needs a certain amount of torque. If it has to go 500 miles between stops, it will need a certain amount of battery. Combine those two and you're going to get performance whether you want it or not, which is not the usual ICE tradeoff. You don't have to use that performance, you're going to get it as a result of your other requirements unless you put an artificial limiter on it.

The "give me a small motor for efficiency because I don't care how slow it is" thinking comes from living with the tradeoffs you get from an ICE. In an EV, it's more likely to be "give me a small battery for a lower price because I don't care if the range is shorter". That's my point. Don't assume a fast truck is optimized to be fast at the expense of range or capability.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

A smaller motor is going to be cheaper to make, and lighter to boot, and a lone motor is cheaper to make and package than multiple motors.

500 mile range hatchback that can recharge in 5 minutes. My Yaris can essentially do that (40mpg with a 12 gallon tank, swapping out recharging with filling the tank) so if an EV can't, its not really that much of a technological improvement, in my mind. Doesn't have to be fast or have AWD or ultra-luxurious or any of that BS. Just something with long legs and short charge time.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

The difference being, I'm looking at it from the personal side of the equation instead of the equipment side. I know how service guys drive. How many times have you seen a white van or truck leave a stop light with the pedal mashed flat? How many times have they cut you off in traffic?

 The extra motor and FWD drivetrain are money spent I don't need. I don't want 4wd. Take that out to save $$$ and give me a larger battery. I want a stripped-down economical vehicle with minimal frills.

The range is not negotiable. It costs me about $75 per man hour to have one guy and a truck sitting at a charging station. The vehicle I buy is going to have to be able to charge at night and run 8 hours without stopping to charge. Some days that's not a problem. I've got three truck on the road today. Two of them are around town and probably won't do 100 miles. One is making a 275-mile loop south to work on a hospital and a library. That truck needs to be able to do that without stopping to charge. 

The industry is moving pretty quickly. I have high hopes that Ford will get around to building a longer-range service vehicle before I need to replace the current fleet in the next couple of years. We shall see. 

Honda e with Koenigsegg's power unit.

I also like GM's old skateboard concpet where an EV platform could have the potential of switching bodies over it.

^The Koenigsegg Terrier is an excellent dual motor + inverter unit.

tuna55 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

A smaller motor is going to be cheaper to make, and lighter to boot, and a lone motor is cheaper to make and package than multiple motors.

Slightly less expensive to make, sure. But I'm looking at the bigger picture. You need torque to move the rated payload. You need battery to get the range. Those are fundamental attributes. You get performance as a side effect of that torque and that battery. I don't care how many motors there are, you need that torque for a given payload.

That's all. If you don't want the performance, you'll have to give up some payload or some range or you'll have to artificially limit it. Just don't assume that because the performance isn't artificially limited that it's coming at some other cost.

How the truck is used is up to the operator. If the operator can't be trusted, then you either change the operator or you limit the truck.

This is all coming from "why is Ford building drag trucks". They're not. They're building vehicles with a payload and range they think the market wants based on a pretty substantial data set. The drag thing is a side effect. You don't lose it unless you give up something else. I'm not saying anything about whether people SHOULD buy an EV or if they're cheaper to purchase or anything like that. Just pointing out that the payload/performance/range equation looks different in an EV, so you can't judge a vehicle in quite the same way as you can with an ICE.

tuna55 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

A smaller motor is going to be cheaper to make, and lighter to boot, and a lone motor is cheaper to make and package than multiple motors.

Electric motors are a lot cheaper than engines, while batteries are a lot more expensive than fuel tanks.  So yes, you'll save some money by going with a smaller, less powerful motor in an EV, but the difference won't be anywhere close to as significant as it is with ICE vehicles.  I would expect to see cost differences in the hundreds of dollars, rather than the thousands.

And that's why they aren't making low power trucks yet.  It's early days, production capacity is limited, and there is a ton more demand for Lightnings than they can meet at the moment.  You get much higher profits on the high end luxury trucks than you do on work trucks, so is it really surprising that Ford is using that capacity where it makes them the most money?

I'm sure they will get to EV work trucks eventually, but don't expect the price savings to be anywhere close to as much, not if you want the range.  That's just not how the tech works.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

You'll need to look at TCO to get the savings. I don't think they'll be as cheap to buy as an equivalent (or less-than-equivalent) ICE for a long, long time. But they're less expensive to operate.

It's interesting to note that VW Europe has reported that half of the preorders for the ID Buzz (aka VW EV bus ) have been for the commercial variant with no rear seats or windows. I think they'll be really well suited to in-town delivery vehicles with known routes, as that's the sort of use an EV is best at.

The Hyundai Vision 74(?) Is pretty cool looking in a Starion kind of way but the EV-ness of it does nothing for me. Big ole meh-burger. The conversation around EVs really seems to be happening around what people "really need" so if that were the case I would get a janky little e-bike and some Frogg Toggs gear and hang out at the 110 outlet with the cool kids. 

I'm trying not to be sarcastic when I say that the answer to what I want in an EV is that I don't. Since that answer isn't acceptable and lands me in the dismissable, noise category I guess I'd say a Vision 74 with a bumpin' system to give me something to listen to. Gauges would be cool but it will be some form of tablet, so the ability to play with gauges will give me something else to not do, I don't do it with the digital dash on the project Mustang, I don't do it on my desktop, I don't do it on my phone. I get things the way I want them and pretty much leave them alone. 

In reply to Error404 :

You don't want to be able to reach the acceleration limits of your tires' grip at most any time with the press of a pedal? I do! I'll want it even more when more of the cars I'm competing with have that ability...

In reply to Toyman! :

You want a truck that has good range and can tow too. In the EV world, that requirement results in a truck that will also have crazy acceleration. If you want the hardware to do what you require without the crazy acceleration then you need software that'll limit the acceleration of the truck so your employees don't do stupid things. But, you'll still have the hardware that's capable of extreme acceleration. They are not building drag trucks, they're building trucks that have a certain range and towing ability. They just haven't used an artificial limiter to keep the truck from being fast, that's what your right foot is for. 

Keith Tanner said:

You'll need to look at TCO to get the savings. I don't think they'll be as cheap to buy as an equivalent (or less-than-equivalent) ICE for a long, long time. But they're less expensive to operate.

I agree.  I don't think the purchase price would ever be as low, but I can definitely see the appeal to a business owner of paying less to charge than to fuel and having significantly reduced maintenance requirements.

Someone commented earlier about wanting a $30K EV work truck, and I don't think that's going to happen.  To make up some numbers, if a luxury Lightning and a luxury gas-engined F-150 are both $70K trucks, and a gas-engined work truck is $30K, then I expect an EV work truck is probably more like $40-45K.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Yes, I know that not drooling over EV performance is wrong but I can't help that the idea just doesn't do much for me. I don't need to shred tires going from 0 to 45. If I want to get a reckless driving ticket, I don't need an EV or it's monthly payment. I'm not a racer, I enjoy track days but I'm typing this from my 8-6  having not been on track at all this year. The Vision 74 at least looks neat, wheels excepted, but that's about it. I know I'm wrong thinking but I don't find any stimulus in EVs. At the same time I recognize that profitability alone makes them inevitable but I don't even get anything from current car tech craziness. So, when I have to go EV I expect that it will be an appliance decision. Put another way, I have not yet seen how an EV will enhance my driving experience unless I'm playing with the touchscreen at a charge stop.

I'll see myself out.

Toyman! said:

I would love for Ford to build a Lightning with an extended cab, 8' bed, 10-second 0-60, and a 500-mile range. Strip it down, white, vinyl, minimal options. Instead, they are building a sub 5 second terror with a crew cab and not enough bed to work out of. Build me a damn service truck, not a drag truck. That's where electrics will shine. 

The acceleration comes from charging speed.  The faster you can push energy into the batteries, the faster you can get it out.

It is a different paradigm from ICEs, for sure.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Business owners are better at making the TCO calculation than private owners because they're actually tracking monthly costs. That's just how people work. Tesla's tried to reflect that in their "potential savings" calculator in their website which is based on reasonable, published assumptions.  I laughed at it the first time I saw it. Now I understand why they do it.

Even Toyman's "every time I stop to charge mid-day I have to pay $75/hour" calculation may be worthwhile, and that's going to vary a lot from case to case. If it only happens twice a month for 30 minutes each time, does that $75 cost get offset by other savings elsewhere? If it happens every day for 30 minutes, you need to be saving $750/month (20 working days * 75 * 0.5) for it to be worthwhile. Can that charging stop be combined with something else, like a lunch break that's going to happen no matter what? The ability to take a step back and look at all those costs together is required.  There will be times when the answer is "yes, the way we do it and the equipment we use to do it is the best choice". But sometimes it can surprise you. For example, look at how much it costs to fill the tank in an ICE versus plugging in an EV at night. If it takes 15 minutes to stop at the gas station and fill up every day, that's $17.50/day or $375/month by the numbers we're using at the moment. And that's just the cost of the time, not the fuel.

Note that I am not campaigning for everyone to switch to EVs for all applications, I just find this sort of thing really interesting. One of the things I do at work is step back and look at those overall costs. It's not unusual to spend a bit of money to save money overall, although it can look quite counter-intuitive at times. 

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

Toyman! said:

I would love for Ford to build a Lightning with an extended cab, 8' bed, 10-second 0-60, and a 500-mile range. Strip it down, white, vinyl, minimal options. Instead, they are building a sub 5 second terror with a crew cab and not enough bed to work out of. Build me a damn service truck, not a drag truck. That's where electrics will shine. 

The acceleration comes from charging speed.  The faster you can push energy into the batteries, the faster you can get it out.

 

It is a different paradigm from ICEs, for sure.

It can take up to 15 hours to charge. That shouldn't be a hard metric to hit. 

In reply to Colin Wood :

I keep thinking about EV swapping an NC MX-5 Miata.  Would like 200 miles of range, 225 or 250 a stretch goal, 100 acceptable for first build with plan to re-battery the thing later after bugs are worked out.  Would like it to otherwise function like the original car; weigh about the same (I know this isn't possible today) or at least feel like it weighs about the same and do 0-60 at maybe 7, 7.5 seconds.  Top speed of 90 seems fine.  Just a good commuter that I could, if I wanted, take out on the road a bit.  

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

People have been swapping Miatas for a long time. I think I saw my first in the late 90s. FM actually sponsored a high school that built an EV NB for an FSAE-type competition against other schools a few years back - and won, I'm proud to say.

It's interesting, I used to get a lot of calls from EV builders who had swapped an NA or NB and then discovered their suspension was insufficient. Their weight distributions were all over the map, clearly they were all coming up with different solutions. Those calls dried up about the time Teslas appeared and it became obvious the lead acid battery + forklift motor on the trans solutions were obsolete.

I think an electric Miata would be a hoot. I did some rough math a while back and came up with 2800 lbs for an EV ND with 200 miles of range and mid-200 hp power levels.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

So that's, what, maybe 3000 lbs for an EV-swapped NC?  More than enough power with what you're quoting.  

This idea makes much more sense than the Capri resto I would like to be starting in the next six or so months so it will probably have to wait a while.

Error404 said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Yes, I know that not drooling over EV performance is wrong but I can't help that the idea just doesn't do much for me. I don't need to shred tires going from 0 to 45. If I want to get a reckless driving ticket, I don't need an EV or it's monthly payment. I'm not a racer, I enjoy track days but I'm typing this from my 8-6  having not been on track at all this year. The Vision 74 at least looks neat, wheels excepted, but that's about it. I know I'm wrong thinking but I don't find any stimulus in EVs. At the same time I recognize that profitability alone makes them inevitable but I don't even get anything from current car tech craziness. So, when I have to go EV I expect that it will be an appliance decision. Put another way, I have not yet seen how an EV will enhance my driving experience unless I'm playing with the touchscreen at a charge stop.

I'll see myself out.

You don't have to like EV's to want one. 
 All you need to want is to save money. 
   Right now a typical ICE costs 18.18 cents per mile for fuel. A typical EV cost 2.9 cents per mile . Plus no oil changes and rare if ever brake jobs. ( regenerative braking. 
  The Tesla and Volt I've driven are not dull. They are nimble enough to have fun in corners.  Plus the acceleration out of the corners is really brisk. 
    Plus they are cheap.  You can start with a new Volt on January 1amd get it for $20,700 ( using the rebate as your down payment. It will go 259 miles  on a charge. 
   Since the average person travels 31 miles per day  that's plenty of range even if you forget to plug it in or the power goes out overnight. 

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

That's about the performance specs I'd like but in something old like a Corvair with minimal electronics other than those required to make the car work 

pres589 (djronnebaum) said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

So that's, what, maybe 3000 lbs for an EV-swapped NC?  More than enough power with what you're quoting.  

This idea makes much more sense than the Capri resto I would like to be starting in the next six or so months so it will probably have to wait a while.

The NC has a heavier powertrain in stock form, so maybe a little less than 3000 with the same specs. It would be fun.

In reply to frenchyd :

Just out of curiosity, which EV do you own? 

For me? Electric aerobatic biplane with 300 mile range and an empty weight of less than 1,200lbs.

When aircraft are electrified,  that's the exact moment EV has solidified for me.