400 mile electric RV

I call BS. Like all EV mileage estimates they don’t state impact of running AC or heat when required. I’m still not prepared to sit for an hour to partially refuel an electric vehicle. They are going to need a lot more charging stations than there are fuel pumps along the highways to handle the flow. And we will still need gas pumps for the foreseeable future unless some mandated use to get rid of gas/diesel vehicles.

dougrainer wrote:
400 miles. BUT, THEY HAVE NOT ADDED HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF WEIGHT. They state "renderings" of what will make it a RV. They just have a body and drivetrain now. What happens to the 400 miles when you have the FULL BLOWN RV version? Is it going to be all electric or will it have LP appliances? ALL ELECTRIC means a drastic reduction in that 400 miles. How is it going to be Cooled? That will be a very hot box if no AC system. Water tanks and holding tanks. These add weight and decrease mileage. Me thinks this is a premature press release to try and gin up enthusiasm. They do not have a actual vehicle to be evaluated yet. Doug

Well they do state 14,000lb for a small class B MH that would normally weigh in at 8-10,000lb. That's good for 2-3 tons of batteries.

Then they claim how great an overweight bloated thing will be off road...because all the best off road vehicles are overweight.

But as you say, it's all renderings.

Just two breakeven question.....

Fact #1. The carbon footprint (pollution) to manufacture BEV's will always be greater than ICE vehicles.

Fact #2. Depending on how the power is generated (coal vs hydro) the pollution to generate electricity for BEV charging is usually less than the pollution for gas production of ICE vehicles; but not always (the pollution from electric production in states like Hawaii is about the same for gas production--no diff)


So my two simple questions...

Question #1. What is the pollution breakeven point (miles driven) for this ERV to be equal to or less than the ICE version? Said differently, what particular mileage point does the accumulated pollution generated from the manufacture and operation of the ERV become less than ICE counterpart?

Question #2. What is the financial breakeven point (miles driven) for the accumulated cost to purchase and operate the ERV to be equal or less then the ICE version?

If you don't know, then how does one validate which vehicle is the "Greenest" for them? Life is not one size fits all.

Timmo! wrote:
Just two breakeven question.....

Fact #1. The carbon footprint (pollution) to manufacture BEV's will always be greater than ICE vehicles.

And your double blind source for this fact is?

valhalla360 wrote:


Well they do state 14,000lb for a small class B MH that would normally weigh in at 8-10,000lb. That's good for 2-3 tons of batteries.

My class C with all tanks full (black, grey, fresh, and fuel) and loaded with food, clothing and the like for a trip came in at 13250 lbs. At that time I had 7 group 29 flooded batteries.

I was not overweight for the axles, but was overweight on the driver's rear tires. I solved that by going to a taller but narrower rim. Side benefit was 1.5 extra inches of clearance.

But I consider MOST class C's to be pavement ponies.

I will wait for the rubber to hit the road before I judge. Yes the article seems full of optimistic generalities.

Well, nowadays we’re fully immersed in a sea of abject falsities and unsubstantiated paradigms - examples will continue to roll out ad nauseam…No doubt, these vehicles are truly engineering marvels, but their sleek novelty (bolstered whole-cloth via PC taxpayer subsidies) in no way suggest an actual net decarbonization - an ‘objective independent analysis’ (rather than the subversion of outcome based science) might likely crash these EV ‘wild-arse’ assumptions. Nor can the substantially hydrocarbon driven, patch work wire collection we call ‘the grid’ support such follies…

Truth is that almost any late model ‘hydrocarbon-DIRECT’ fueled vehicle is very nearly a zero emissions vehicle - yes they emit carbon dioxide (what we exhale, and a fertilizer for plants and rain forest…), but only the weakest of objective evidence exist (or of other anthropomorphic activities) that CO2 substantially contributes to warming cycles (with ‘slight of hand’ far greater causes are neglected or dismissed), but to challenge the vested policy inertia behind the existing (unsubstantiated, absent objective critique) Public Policy narrative will impulsively result in swift political and social rebuke if not complete immolation…This is but one example whereby critical policy execution is lacking objective independent review and critical analysis… From my perspective, Western Nation Academia is terrible conflicted, and in danger of becoming a ‘driven by profit’ educational mausoleum…R.I.P.

3 tons

Am I the only one that noticed it would do UP TO 400 MILES on a charge? Kind of like saying your mh could get up to 40 MPG. Maybe off the side of a mountain!

Marketing hype for electric vehicles.

pianotuna wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:


Well they do state 14,000lb for a small class B MH that would normally weigh in at 8-10,000lb. That's good for 2-3 tons of batteries.

My class C with all tanks full (black, grey, fresh, and fuel) and loaded with food, clothing and the like for a trip came in at 13250 lbs. At that time I had 7 group 29 flooded batteries.

I was not overweight for the axles, but was overweight on the driver's rear tires. I solved that by going to a taller but narrower rim. Side benefit was 1.5 extra inches of clearance.

But I consider MOST class C's to be pavement ponies.

What size class C? From the pics this looks like a 20ft B+ with SRW.

Update: I looked at your profile, you list a 28ft Class C...roughly 1/3 longer than this unit...so not surprising it's a good bit heavier.

What's next? Heavier than air flying machines?

DHC-2 Beaver, electric propulsion:

Electric DHC-2 seaplane

Naysayers and Boo Birds carry on.