Very typical use case. /s
Gas cars have never run out of fuel. /s
I’m actually happy that I have a standard range. I just recently finished the longest road trip I’ve ever taken in my 64 years and it was a great experience. The only thing that isn‘t ideal is the <200 kW charge rate. If there was Lightning with a 100 kWh, 800V system that could double the charge curve of the current one it would be perfect. Plus the $10k I saved when I bought it is nice too.
I agree with you 100%!!
Both CATL and BYD, huge reputable battery companies, CATL supplies Ford announce they will have Solid state batteries in production within a couple of years. The only problem to solve is getting charge times down. If you could fill up a current lightning in 5 minutes, range would not be an issue. Gas stations as is could easily be converted to charge stations. Same amount of stalls and pull through because the wait times would be the same as a gas fill up. But yes the Magic Batteries are talked about as much as the Magic EREV trucks that solves all of life's problems with no draw backs. The only reason Scout pre-orders are skewed toward EREV is that so many people drank the koolaid. Especially scout, which chose a small generator. That thing is going to be junk, if again, it ever makes it to market.
And yet...I've been driving my Trabant for 10+ years and the RAM and FORD's EREV's that are in Magic and Dream land are far superior as fact. You outlined my points perfectly. For a truck a 84HP 4 banger is not going to cut it. (yes, it's a loud annoying lawn mower sound). and 16.5KW battery is not going to cut it either. So they are going to need up things significantly to haul around a heavy truck towing 14k lbs. That is not going to be cheap in terms of weight and price.
Now you are claiming I don't even know how EREV's work. Oh yes the miracle of providing unlimited energy out of a lawn mower engine theory. If they just would have figured this out sooner, we could have put these lawn mowers in superduties and semis. Heck, if these things are so great, why aren't they starting with a F450 EREV.
You do realize that even if they kept the same battery size that the EREV's efficiency and range would be less because its now hauling around an engine/fuel/and components. Others have shown that the battery savings won't be much at all in order to keep a decent range. Then you state "nobody wants those, referring to a pure EV" LOL... What the heck does that mean. The only purpose to consider an EREV is that you want to use it primarily as a BEV but have the ability to go further at times with gas. If not, why not just get a gas truck. So to keep costs down, you want a smaller battery which will give you low range, low pack level perfomance, with less efficiency due to the extra weight. In other words, a poor BEV experience. and you want a small noisy engine to save costs that now needs to haul around a heavy battery for no reason giving you a poor gas vehicle experience. You can't have it both ways. In order for this vehicle to be spec'ed properly to give a decent experience (still worse than BEV or ICE) its going to be priced higher then a BEV.
I think you need to pick an argument and stick with it. In the first you seem to be implying trips of that distance are extremely rare (in which case, an EREV owner would be using very, very little gas for the bulk of their use).
I think you need to actually read the context of what was said. Your comment makes no sense.
It was generalized. I wasn't saying it doesn't work perfectly well for lots of people. It was generalized in the context of getting a wider customer base to actually buy it. Being lacking in some specific capabilities (even if they aren't needed very often for most people) tends to drive buyers away. You can argue they're making the wrong choice, but it's their money.
You are the one who said hopping in for a 200-300 mile trip was a use case car companies should plan for, not me. And then later in the same post you said for these long trips, that you brought up, aren't even as efficient as an ICE truck. The EREV will be worse in battery only situations than a BEV and will be worse in gas only situations than an ICE vehicle. What is the point??
If you don't want to read my posts, that's fine. But if you feel compelled to comment on them, actually reading them first may be helpful.
The statement was regarding exactly how far the BEV range is doesn't matter much when it is much longer than most people need on a daily basis--and that when you do exceed it on an occasional trip, it won't matter in any noticeable way. It had nothing to do with companies "planning for" such trips.
No, my comment on efficiency for those trips was clearly not that. I put it in bold above so there's a remote chance you'll notice it this time. When I said you may not save much on gas I was talking about much, much, longer trips.
200-300 miles is not a "really long trip."
You can tell yourself that if it makes you feel better but there's no evidence this will be the case when compared with an EV of decent battery size.
I gave a nice list of reasons it will be better than a ICE truck, even in gas-only situations. Maybe go back and read those? And if you don't think any specific reason is correct, point it out with specifics? Generalized slurs with nothing to back them up aren't going to be taken seriously by anybody.
In California we have to smog test ice auto every two years another reason I love my Lightning my question is will we have to smog test this gas generator?
Yup.. these guys are way too close to the situation to realize they are a niche/corner case at best. We'll solve these problems too though. And the solution will ultimately be a BEV.
