Camping in an EV.... Always charging...

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

So here is the start of the FLT driving from Sacramento to Ak in their electric F150 Lighting.

Just a few observations from me:

#1. To put a "canopy" on a truck and calling it a camper is a joke. "Come on man" I never knew I had a "camper" on my truck all the time? :S

#2.Did he ever say how much time it took to charge on this trip? If so, I missed it. If not, TOTALLY unactable. If so, can someone tell me how many hours it took to charge. That is a huge part of camping in one of these things.

#3. He had to stop 9 times!!! 9 times!!! I would have to stop 1 time in the same trip with my ICE truck. Lets say it took an hour per stop. That would add a day to this small trip.

#4. To put a piece of whatever on top of your cab and say you got X improvement to aero is a joke. I have towed that route many, many times and my fuel mileage has varied a lot just from traffic or wind or whatever. Besides, the biggest aero improvement to this rig is going to be from the back and has nothing to do with the front.

#5. Maybe it was just the way the guy looked, but he looked very frazzled a lot of times to me? Not relaxed at all? Range anxiety? :h

In any event, I hope they put a "real" camper on the back of that thing and do a trip. Or hook a travel trailer to the back of this truck and do a trip like most of us on this forum would do. You know, a real average TT like I see on 100's of F150 around the US.

If they want it realistic, they need to make it realistic.

[8_1_Van]

I have two E bikes that I solar charge and next year I plan on selling my 2017 Chevy Sonic with 4 cyl. turbo and 6 speed manual and convert my 29+ mountain bike into a fast 72v E bike with large battery. I could use my van or my wife's Honda Fit that she might upgrade to a 2023 Chevy Bolt EUV next year if the price is great after the $4K NJ EV and $7,500 Federal EV subsidy.


$7500 subsidy for Tesla & GM EVs returns

[toedtoes]

Sjm9911 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
The horse got you about a total of 12 miles in a day. The automobile got you 30 miles an hour.

But folks argued against the auto because "there isn't enough gas to run them", "you'll run out of gas before you make it to your destination", "there isn't enough gas to run all these autos" (ie, there is no infrastructure to power all these autos) and "they're too expensive to run", "they're a fad", "they are impractical", etc.

In the end, the infrastructure was built to accommodate them. That's why there's a gas station on every corner. That didn't come first. Just like the infrastructure for electric vehicles isn't being built first - it's being built as more electric vehicles are put on the road. Supply and demand...

Its atually a pretty fair point. When combustion engiens were being evented it probably was the same thing. Reliability, infastruture, and the like. And it probably didnt go swimmingly for them at first eaither. And , I will state i am in diffrent in this. I like the idea, but dont think its anywhere near sustainable yet. But , I never lived in the olden days eaither. So I guess anything is or can be possable in the future.

Nothing that has happened in human history has been thought out, well planned, etc. To think that electric vehicles won't happen because there is no infrastructure is silly. The automobile happened without a well built fuel infrastructure, without roads, etc.

The more people who buy electric vehicles, the sooner the infrastructure will happen.

Personally, I don't have an electric vehicle and I don't having one in the near future for various reasons. But that doesn't mean I can't accept that they are most likely here to stay.

[Sjm9911]

toedtoes wrote:
The horse got you about a total of 12 miles in a day. The automobile got you 30 miles an hour.

But folks argued against the auto because "there isn't enough gas to run them", "you'll run out of gas before you make it to your destination", "there isn't enough gas to run all these autos" (ie, there is no infrastructure to power all these autos) and "they're too expensive to run", "they're a fad", "they are impractical", etc.

In the end, the infrastructure was built to accommodate them. That's why there's a gas station on every corner. That didn't come first. Just like the infrastructure for electric vehicles isn't being built first - it's being built as more electric vehicles are put on the road. Supply and demand...

Its atually a pretty fair point. When combustion engiens were being evented it probably was the same thing. Reliability, infastruture, and the like. And it probably didnt go swimmingly for them at first eaither. And , I will state i am in diffrent in this. I like the idea, but dont think its anywhere near sustainable yet. But , I never lived in the olden days eaither. So I guess anything is or can be possable in the future.

[PButler96]

toedtoes wrote:

PButler96 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
I was just watching a show about the start of "horseless carriages". Seems the arguments on why the automobile would never replace the horse are the same exact arguments as to why the electric vehicle will never replace the ICE.

Guess what? The infrastructure happened despite the naysayers.

The argument in 1890 was that the use of horses was going to cause climate change?

What a cluster!

I thimk you need to take reading comprehension. Climate change is NOT the argument AGAINST electric vehicles.

I thought you hit the ignore button on me a week or two ago?

Evidently not. WTF?

[toedtoes]

The horse got you about a total of 12 miles in a day. The automobile got you 30 miles an hour.

But folks argued against the auto because "there isn't enough gas to run them", "you'll run out of gas before you make it to your destination", "there isn't enough gas to run all these autos" (ie, there is no infrastructure to power all these autos) and "they're too expensive to run", "they're a fad", "they are impractical", etc.

In the end, the infrastructure was built to accommodate them. That's why there's a gas station on every corner. That didn't come first. Just like the infrastructure for electric vehicles isn't being built first - it's being built as more electric vehicles are put on the road. Supply and demand...

[time2roll]

Pollution was getting to be a terrible struggle in the cities with so many horses.

In the end I believe it was cost that drove the transition. Can't turn the horse off when not in use. Now even a vehicle idling is considered polluting, waste and cost.

[shelbyfv]

Sorry, toed has it right. I didn't point it out because it was posted so late at night. Doubling down here long before happy hour shows more deficiencies in comprehension. LOL.... I did get his point, even phrased backwards. Again, climate change= horse out of barn.

[Grit_dog]

Lol, cmon toetoes. Now re read what was said.

[toedtoes]

PButler96 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
I was just watching a show about the start of "horseless carriages". Seems the arguments on why the automobile would never replace the horse are the same exact arguments as to why the electric vehicle will never replace the ICE.

Guess what? The infrastructure happened despite the naysayers.

The argument in 1890 was that the use of horses was going to cause climate change?

What a cluster!

I thimk you need to take reading comprehension. Climate change is NOT the argument AGAINST electric vehicles.

[shelbyfv]

PButler96 wrote:
The argument in 1890 was that the use of horses was going to cause climate change?

What a cluster!

You guys would be better served by repeating grid, grid, grid and range, range, range. The climate change horse has left the barn.;)

[PButler96]

toedtoes wrote:
I was just watching a show about the start of "horseless carriages". Seems the arguments on why the automobile would never replace the horse are the same exact arguments as to why the electric vehicle will never replace the ICE.

Guess what? The infrastructure happened despite the naysayers.

The argument in 1890 was that the use of horses was going to cause climate change?

What a cluster!

[toedtoes]

I was just watching a show about the start of "horseless carriages". Seems the arguments on why the automobile would never replace the horse are the same exact arguments as to why the electric vehicle will never replace the ICE.

Guess what? The infrastructure happened despite the naysayers.

[time2roll]

Huntindog wrote:

time2roll wrote:
Electricity is shifting to solar and wind primarily for the lower cost to generate. And at the same time it will increase costs?

+1 to simply generate your own. Or at least 50%.

Oh geez, this is going circular.
The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine...Yet everyone expects power 24/7..And no battery backup is not a realistic solution at the scale it would take.

As long as these projects continue we will get there....

https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2019-09-10/ladwp-votes-on-eland-solar-contract

"The combined solar power and energy storage is priced at 3.3 cents per kilowatt-hour — a record low for this type of contract, city officials and independent experts say, and cheaper than electricity from natural gas."

And this was three years ago before the run up in the cost of NG.

[Huntindog]

time2roll wrote:
Electricity is shifting to solar and wind primarily for the lower cost to generate. And at the same time it will increase costs?

+1 to simply generate your own. Or at least 50%.

Oh geez, this is going circular.
The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine...Yet everyone expects power 24/7..And no battery backup is not a realistic solution at the scale it would take.