So who will be first with an electric pickup. And when.

[John___Angela]

Ford plans US$11 billion investment for 40 electrified vehicles by 2022. Link below.

https://www.bnn.ca/ford-plans-us-11-billion-investment-for-40-electrified-vehicles-by-2022-1.968176

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

Wait; what? :h

First you say that:
"Most of the best RV places from us are 70 to 120 miles away. Although we do the occasional long trip, most summer weekend camping is fairly close." And you don't mind waiting around for a battery to charge.

And now you say that an electric pickup with an electric 80 mile range "won't suit you very well."

:h :h :h

[John___Angela]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
I guess I don't understand this thread? :h

John, if you want an electric pickup all you have to do is write a check for 52 grand and buy it.

With 460 HP it has more power than any diesel or gas pickup on the market. First is already done. :H Just buy the thing.

Good morning.

Although it looks like it would be pretty functional for a contracter hybrids are not our thing and woukdn’t suit us very well. When the do come out with a 1/2 ton EV we might consider it depending on what we do in our next EV phase. We are all over the map. Small tear drop or Aliner we can pull behind a sedan or maybe a 21 foot Bigfoot more suited to a half ton. Or small class B EV. Whatever it is it will have to be supported by good charge infrastructure. Time will tell. It will be fun seeing who gets there first.

Until then we’ll stay with the big diesel pusher for snowbirding in the USA but that will be over in about 5 years when we retire at 60. So the manufacturers have a little time to invent their solution for us. 🙂

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

I guess I don't understand this thread? :h

John, if you want an electric pickup all you have to do is write a check for 52 grand and buy it.

With 460 HP it has more power than any diesel or gas pickup on the market. First is already done. :H Just buy the thing.

[John___Angela]

valhalla360 wrote:

John & Angela wrote:

I was referring to conventional RV solar for the house. Not the traction battery. When we dry camp it also sometimes involve non sunny spots so RV solar is sometimes not a great assist. Access to the 100- 150 KWH vehicle traction battery would be useful for us for smaller loads. May not work for your uses. Even if you pulled 4 KW a day for 7 days of camping it would be little load for the traction battery. 4 KW can go a long way when dry camping...at least for us. Every body camps different.

I also was referring to conventional RV solar.

4kw for 7 days is a crazy amount of power. That's 672kwh. Back when we had a house, our electric bill was typically only half that with the central air running.

If you meant 4kwh per day...that's around 28kwh.
- That's not much power so, it would have to be marketed as very limited or you would have people burning thru too much power and running out of power.
- Even if that fits you electric usage, it leaves you with a pretty narrow range of usefulness. If the RV has a 150kwh battery...that's going to eat up 20% of range (realistically more like 25% since you don't want to go to 0% on the batteries) that leaves you only around 80kwh. Assuming you are pulling power at 3 times what a tesla does and you keep a 20% reserve in case you need to detour or otherwise use more than expected, you are limited to camping within 40 miles of home.

This feature might come out but it likely wouldn't be geared toward the RV market but contractors.

I think a lot depends on the campers and the time of the year. Furnace use when it is colder. (we don't use AC when dry camping so not a thing). Eating up 25 percent of range shouldn't be a big deal depending on where you camp I suppose. I didn't understand your comment on 40 miles from home. Why would proximity to home come into play. Did you mean 40 mile from the DC fast charge point? Sorry we might be on different wave lengths here. No worries.

I agree it would be a very useful thing for contracters. Maybe even a 240 volt feed for bigger power tools.

[valhalla360]

John & Angela wrote:

I was referring to conventional RV solar for the house. Not the traction battery. When we dry camp it also sometimes involve non sunny spots so RV solar is sometimes not a great assist. Access to the 100- 150 KWH vehicle traction battery would be useful for us for smaller loads. May not work for your uses. Even if you pulled 4 KW a day for 7 days of camping it would be little load for the traction battery. 4 KW can go a long way when dry camping...at least for us. Every body camps different.

I also was referring to conventional RV solar.

4kw for 7 days is a crazy amount of power. That's 672kwh. Back when we had a house, our electric bill was typically only half that with the central air running.

If you meant 4kwh per day...that's around 28kwh.
- That's not much power so, it would have to be marketed as very limited or you would have people burning thru too much power and running out of power.
- Even if that fits you electric usage, it leaves you with a pretty narrow range of usefulness. If the RV has a 150kwh battery...that's going to eat up 20% of range (realistically more like 25% since you don't want to go to 0% on the batteries) that leaves you only around 80kwh. Assuming you are pulling power at 3 times what a tesla does and you keep a 20% reserve in case you need to detour or otherwise use more than expected, you are limited to camping within 40 miles of home.

This feature might come out but it likely wouldn't be geared toward the RV market but contractors.

[ppine]

It is a question of the infrastucture keeping up with the tecnology. One of the great things about boondocking with a diesel is the large fuel tank and exteded range. For boondocking electric vehicles may not be the best, because it will be a long way between charnging points.

[John___Angela]

thomas201 wrote:
As others have said payload, Payload, PAYLOAD, this is where we always get into trouble with our campers. EVs will need a breakthrough to work for 5ers and travel trailers.

The service plan for the X-all wheel drive is $2750 for 50K, or 4 years. The service plan for a Ford Super Duty diesel, just about the biggest service hog of all, is $3750 for an 8/100, so equalized to the Tesla $1875 for 4/50k. So from the dealers the Tesla is expensive. Maybe something is missing, since a 18 year old at Wally World charges $13.95 (19.95 at most) to change the oil, if you bring the oil and filter. So with materials at about $75, less on sale, the cost is $75 DIY, or $89 without getting my hands dirty. Based on this the Tesla either needs a lot of care, or they are shafting the buyers. So for 5yr and 50k miles, with half towing miles, 1 free dealer oil change, 7 DIY and 1 Wally world: $614. Please note this is about 5500 miles a change, much too often, but I change before long trips. Three fuel filter changes, $225 DIY. Plus one kit to test the Antifreeze, $50 and 1 quart of booster for the primary coolant system $9. Five tire rotations (I did one myself) at $25 each for $100, plus one air filter change for $60 we have a total of $1058. Tires still got 10K left (25k of the 50k towing wear, don't forget) and the brake pads half worn. The only problem was the factory trailer brake controller, which was replaced free. Wiper blades are still factory. I have added windshield washer fluid, but no brake or transmission fluid yet. So please drop the no maintenance garbage, it is there, just different. And really, really expensive.

Yah I agree. Pricey. We have spoken with many Tesla owners and although I am sure they sell maintenance plans we have never actually met someone who has bought one. Many do their own maintenance which isn't much. We do our own but really haven't had to do much. We have to replace a dessicant filter soon. It was 18 bucks on EBAY and is a 3 minute job. Service contracts are crazy priced.

[John___Angela]

valhalla360 wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
One thing I would like to see in a pickup is a built in 2000 watt pure sine wave inverter for utility or camping use. Make it so the traction battery can’t be run below a certain percentage point. Eg. If you know you need 35 per cent to get home or to the nearest fast charger station so you can’t run the traction battery below 35 percent. This would add a lot to the off grid camping experience in my opinion. Solar on RV’s is great but we tend to look for shaded spots soooo. I hope they do the same think with b class type vans.

Even in sunny spots, solar isn't viable for propulsion level charging with an RV. A 500w system might generate 2kwh per day, so to fill a 100kwh battery bank from 50% discharge would take 25 days. Plus if you have a solar system, you don't need to pull off the truck batteries in the first place.

I could see something like this for contractors not towing. Power saws and similar tools need a lot of power but for short periods of time. Often they just crank up a portable generator and leave it running for hours when they use the saw for 5 seconds every 5 minutes. I don't see it as a viable RV use.

Pulling power for the RV from the truck battery sounds great but they are already struggling to get sufficient range eating up 50-70 miles of range with no way to recharge cuts that range even more.

I was referring to conventional RV solar for the house. Not the traction battery. When we dry camp it also sometimes involve non sunny spots so RV solar is sometimes not a great assist. Access to the 100- 150 KWH vehicle traction battery would be useful for us for smaller loads. May not work for your uses. Even if you pulled 4 KW a day for 7 days of camping it would be little load for the traction battery. 4 KW can go a long way when dry camping...at least for us. Every body camps different.

[1320Fastback]

Workhorse is already producing a electric truck.

Hook up your travel trailers boys, its got a 80 mile range and if the current Tesla towing reports apply it will have a 40 mile range.

[thomas201]

As others have said payload, Payload, PAYLOAD, this is where we always get into trouble with our campers. EVs will need a breakthrough to work for 5ers and travel trailers.

The service plan for the X-all wheel drive is $2750 for 50K, or 4 years. The service plan for a Ford Super Duty diesel, just about the biggest service hog of all, is $3750 for an 8/100, so equalized to the Tesla $1875 for 4/50k. So from the dealers the Tesla is expensive. Maybe something is missing, since a 18 year old at Wally World charges $13.95 (19.95 at most) to change the oil, if you bring the oil and filter. So with materials at about $75, less on sale, the cost is $75 DIY, or $89 without getting my hands dirty. Based on this the Tesla either needs a lot of care, or they are shafting the buyers. So for 5yr and 50k miles, with half towing miles, 1 free dealer oil change, 7 DIY and 1 Wally world: $614. Please note this is about 5500 miles a change, much too often, but I change before long trips. Three fuel filter changes, $225 DIY. Plus one kit to test the Antifreeze, $50 and 1 quart of booster for the primary coolant system $9. Five tire rotations (I did one myself) at $25 each for $100, plus one air filter change for $60 we have a total of $1058. Tires still got 10K left (25k of the 50k towing wear, don't forget) and the brake pads half worn. The only problem was the factory trailer brake controller, which was replaced free. Wiper blades are still factory. I have added windshield washer fluid, but no brake or transmission fluid yet. So please drop the no maintenance garbage, it is there, just different. And really, really expensive.

[valhalla360]

jrp26789 wrote:
Someday cars will pull the electricity out of the pavement. Much like cell phones on a surface charger. No plugs. They can go for days, and batteries for the back roads. 1000 hp motors and 100%torque at no rpm. It will be amazing, I hope to see it.

I'm in the highway business and no way do they use in pavement systems. The expense would just be massive. Even if pursued, most pavements don't get reconstructed for 20-30yrs, so it would be a very long time before the system would be converted.

What is somewhat viable is overhead cantenary. This is a well established technology used for city bus systems and rail. There are some experiments to place it on highways for trucks to use with small battery packs to get from the freeway to warehouses.

But even overhead is still massively expensive to outfit on a freeway wide scale...let alone secondary roads.

It might someday take over and RV's might be able to take advantage of it but I would expect it to start first on major trucking routes where dedicated trucks could be used. Then if successful it might spread to other routes. Rural routes popular with RV's could easily be 30-40yrs out...assuming nothing better comes along.

[valhalla360]

John & Angela wrote:
One thing I would like to see in a pickup is a built in 2000 watt pure sine wave inverter for utility or camping use. Make it so the traction battery can’t be run below a certain percentage point. Eg. If you know you need 35 per cent to get home or to the nearest fast charger station so you can’t run the traction battery below 35 percent. This would add a lot to the off grid camping experience in my opinion. Solar on RV’s is great but we tend to look for shaded spots soooo. I hope they do the same think with b class type vans.

Even in sunny spots, solar isn't viable for propulsion level charging with an RV. A 500w system might generate 2kwh per day, so to fill a 100kwh battery bank from 50% discharge would take 25 days. Plus if you have a solar system, you don't need to pull off the truck batteries in the first place.

I could see something like this for contractors not towing. Power saws and similar tools need a lot of power but for short periods of time. Often they just crank up a portable generator and leave it running for hours when they use the saw for 5 seconds every 5 minutes. I don't see it as a viable RV use.

Pulling power for the RV from the truck battery sounds great but they are already struggling to get sufficient range eating up 50-70 miles of range with no way to recharge cuts that range even more.

[valhalla360]

John & Angela wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:

drsteve wrote:
Electric vehicles will eventually send internal combustion to the scrapyard. Aside from the environmental advantages, less required scheduled maintenance and less likelihood of expensive repairs will be the difference makers.

I do not know anyone who owns an EV and hates it.

I think the maintenance savings are a myth. Other than oil changes about once a year, I haven't had engine work on a vehicle in years. It's mostly brakes, tires, suspension...all of which EV's have.

Yeah, there are occasional motor problems but I'm betting those are offset by electrical problems.

As far as early adopters, I would take that with a huge grain of salt. To spend far more on an EV only to admit it was a mistake means most unsatisfied EV owners, quietly dispose of them and never speak of it again. It won't be until we see large scale production with average people buying them that we can start to get good results from polls.

Brakes not so much. EV's don't really use brakes much as much of the speed reduction is done with regenerative braking. Still have brake fluid though. Reduced fuel costs have to be considered...depending on which country or region you live in your savings can be substantial especially for those who put on a lot of miles. Not our case as we seem to drive only about 12 to 16 K per year but it still is a reasonable savings in fuel. Not to mention the convenience of fueling at home.

But I agree it can be a myth depending on the car. Hi end EV's like Tesla are like high end Audis or Mercedes or BMW's and come with 300 dollar annual maintenance schedules with includes a late and a schone. Cheaper cars like a 30 thousand dollar leaf not so much. Many people have had their leafs for 7 years and never brought it in for a single check. If you drop 80 grand on a Tesla S though you better expect a pricier maintenence schedule. Wether you follow it or not or do it yourself is up to you.

Since when is fuel or plugging in to recharge considered "maintenance". That's usually considered fueling. As long as the electric car has sufficient functionality, yes electric is cheaper to fuel but that wasn't the point of my comment. Also expect that to change. Many states are looking at options to recoup lost fuel taxes which can run 25-40% of the cost of a gallon of gas (depends on the current price). That will eat up a lot of the fuel savings. Electric will still probably come out cheaper (fueling specific) but it will result in much more time to recoup the up front cost.

I've usually had a stick and would get 30-40k out of a set of brakes, so every 3-4yrs as I would downshift coming up to a stop sign rather than jamming on the brakes at the last second.

Again other than an oil change around once a year, I don't take vehicles in for maintenance. Transmission and radiator are usual good for 4-5yrs with normal use...after that not much regular maintenance recommended and I know lots of people who never do the transmission or radiator, similar to your Leaf example.

Again, the maintenance claim might have some truth to it but if it averages $100/yr difference, I would be surprised. It's certainly not the big selling point some make it out to be.

[John___Angela]

azrving wrote:

John & Angela wrote:

azrving wrote:

jrp26789 wrote:
Someday cars will pull the electricity out of the pavement. Much like cell phones on a surface charger. No plugs. They can go for days, and batteries for the back roads. 1000 hp motors and 100%torque at no rpm. It will be amazing, I hope to see it.

And this will help global warming and the environment in what way? 🙂

Yah. Most people we know don't buy EV's for enviromental reasons. Kind of a myth out there among non EV drivers. Most of us drive them because we like the driving experience. Too each his own.

The subsidy is no myth. How does it help a working stiff who cant even afford one?

Yah I get that. But 30,000 (no subsidy) bucks is not that bad and gets you a few choices if you are okay with 150 miles range. Heck ours is older and only has around 110 miles but fills 100 percent of our needs. Everyone is different of course and everyone has different needs. Get something used for half that. I don't know what kind of subsidies your country or state has. It may be cheaper than that. Who knows. Not up on subsidies. If you need longer range you will be north of 35000 bucks (assuming no subsidies). But 35,000 to 40,000 will get you around 240 miles of range. That would be a Tesla model 3 or a Chevy bolt. If you need north of 330 miles you are looking at about 45000 (before subsidies if applicable) for a long range model 3 Tesla. VERY nice car though. Little pricey for me as well. Whatever you get make sure it has fast charge . If it is a Tesla that is standard but not a chevy bolt. You might have to wait a year or so for a Model 3 as there are reservations for the next 400,000 or so. Bolt is nice but small...and in my opinion not very refined. We love the Leaf but I think you are in Arizona and some earlier Leafs have had a hard time with hot climates.

[azrving]

John & Angela wrote:

azrving wrote:

jrp26789 wrote:
Someday cars will pull the electricity out of the pavement. Much like cell phones on a surface charger. No plugs. They can go for days, and batteries for the back roads. 1000 hp motors and 100%torque at no rpm. It will be amazing, I hope to see it.

And this will help global warming and the environment in what way? 🙂

Yah. Most people we know don't buy EV's for enviromental reasons. Kind of a myth out there among non EV drivers. Most of us drive them because we like the driving experience. Too each his own.

The subsidy is no myth. How does it help a working stiff who cant even afford one?