Alternative Fuels & Propulsion RANDOM

[oldshurst442]

On 9/2/2020 at 2:59 PM, balthazar said:

IC bans CANNOT be enacted until the tech is readily able to filter down to the low income tier of consumers.

I MOST HEARTEDLY AGREE with this.  If government wants to play for everybody, than everybody needs a chance to own one.  NEW. And since taxpayer money will fund this project of switching from ICE to EVs, than the market should be able to sustain itself because there simply isnt an infinite amount of public money around . There are other NECESSARY projects that need public funding.  

On 9/3/2020 at 5:13 PM, balthazar said:

 I'm simply applying real world scenarios / questions that a unilateral ban unquestionably would see the disadvantaged, further disadvantaged. Have the 'ban ideologues' considered these scenarios? Are you sure?

- - - - -
Let me interject this here: have any of these U.S. proposed IC bans been defined at literally banning ALL IC vehicles at Date X, or is it merely banning the FUTURE SALE of new IC vehicles? I strongly doubt a unilateral ban would stand up legally (the grandfathering legal basis), but I put nothing past idiot planners & 'the good of the many' futurists.
- --

 

I agree, and what @Drew Dowdell  gave as a response, 

 

IS NOT a VIABLE solution.  Its not safe. In ANY WAY, its not safe.  Its ugly. Yada yada yada.

And what I said about wireless charging and charging on the fly tech.  Is ALSO not a viable solution as what North  America has as a road infrastructure, its super expensive and nearly impossible to dig up all our roadways to install a wireless, charge on the fly system.  

On 9/3/2020 at 9:17 PM, balthazar said:

I'll nutshell my interjection here : the "BAN".  The term needs to be defined, and of course it's going to vary widely depending on the source.

This was from a Feb '20 article :

As stated above [RED ARROW], I can live with that (bill failed to get voted on, BTW).  There's a semblance of attrition allowed to work naturally... so that 10s and 10s of millions of IC vehicles will still be running & driving for decades & decades & decades to come. That's as it should be, and there the lowest income folk don't get stepped on right away. Also- it allows the classic car hobbyist to continue...

 

There needs to be a ban for ICE as it will FORCE the change.  Too much oil money is out there for the EVs to fully gain traction FAIRLY.  

Is a change to EVs a better, cleaner solution?

Nobody knows really....

But for it to work, to be cleaner, then ALL the pie in the sky EV hooplas HAVE to be put into play.  All the battey recycling programs and ideas HAVE to be adopted by ALL the countries in the world.  The 2nd and 3rd life of car batteries as housing and building energy sources and when those lifes have ended, to recycle the elements once again NEED to be part of our future as well.  And EVERYBODY on the planet NEEDS to follow that same path. No rogue countries...

With that being said, what I just wrote. Its a daunting, almost impossible task to achieve.  

1. EV supporters also have a greedy, seedy side to them as much as big oil.

2. Money.  Where is all this money going to come from that is needed to achieve all of this?  Its great that Communist China is gonna fit the bill for part of it. Elon Musk too.    But that is just a smidgen of how much is REALLY needed to achieve this eutopia.  And NOT everyone is on board with this.  

3. The technology is not where it needs to be just yet to make the switch as how you discussed it.  (I understand fully where you are coming from) 

4. Its like autonomous driving.  Its nice to talk about how peachy it will be in the future, but have the folk that want this discussed how much electrical energy is needed to be produced for ALL cars in the world to be powered by electricity? 

How will this happen?   In Quebec, China, I could see how.  In Italy and Greece,  Oaxaca, Mexico (drug cartels and corruption amongst the problems) and other poor, landlocked areas,  not so much.     Nuclear power is worse than oil in terms of pollution.  In case of a natural disaster...ouch.

5. If the electrical grid fails, for whatever reason, how are we gonna cope with that?  

What I mean by that is, it seems that we wanna wane off of oil, nuclear power...we want to put all our eggs in th electricity basket.  Solar, wind, water.  The thing is, all that energy is distributed with the same transportation. IE: generator stations producing or collecting the energy than distributing it along cables and lines.  But its the SAME network....

If that network is severed, then NO power at ALL.

With oil, oil is distributed by rail, by ship, by pipelines by trucks.  PLUS, oil today, has a companion in nuclear and electrical to feed us humans power.    We want to sever the ties with oil and nuclear as a power source...

 

I wanted to show you, that I fully understand and support your stance. I wanted to find common ground with you. I think we have succeeded in complimenting each other's point of view. 

[Drew Dowdell]

On 9/5/2020 at 12:25 PM, riviera74 said:

That may be true right now, but how many EVs will age out before the batteries in them die when they become a lot more commonplace?

Whatever the percentage is today and multiply that out by the number of EVs sold in the future.  It isn't a knowable number at the moment.

[Drew Dowdell]

3 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

5. If the electrical grid fails, for whatever reason, how are we gonna cope with that?  

What I mean by that is, it seems that we wanna wane off of oil, nuclear power...we want to put all our eggs in th electricity basket.  Solar, wind, water.  The thing is, all that energy is distributed with the same transportation. IE: generator stations producing or collecting the energy than distributing it along cables and lines.  But its the SAME network....

If that network is severed, then NO power at ALL.

With oil, oil is distributed by rail, by ship, by pipelines by trucks.  PLUS, oil today, has a companion in nuclear and electrical to feed us humans power.    We want to sever the ties with oil and nuclear as a power source...

 

I wanted to show you, that I fully understand and support your stance. I wanted to find common ground with you. I think we have succeeded in complimenting each other's point of view. 

If the electrical grid fails, you still aren't pumping gas.  I've been in south florida after a hurricane when no one had power... you're still not pumping gas.  I had an extra 20 gallons strapped to the back of the Honda when I went down and I got gas at what was probably the last available station before the power outages and it took me two hours of waiting in line to get my 16 gallons.  They wanted to fuss at me about the gas cans on the back of the car because they thought I wanted to fill those also, but I had filled them in PA before I went down. 

[Drew Dowdell]

On a different tack, one of the only things that bothers me about the Avalanche is how un-green of a vehicle it is, slurping down gasoline at 16 miles per gallon.

However, the conversation we had here the other day about E85 made me do some figuring, and I think I'm just going to run E85 all the time from now on. It will cost an extra $125 every 10,000 miles to do it, but I think it's worth it in order to use a renewable fuel. Plus, of course, Moar Powah!

Also, by using E85, I will be using less than half the amount of petroleum that a Toyota Pruis would be.  In fact, a vehicle would have to achieve an average 83mpg to use as little petroleum as I do when running E85.

[oldshurst442]

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

If the electrical grid fails, you still aren't pumping gas.  I've been in south florida after a hurricane when no one had power... you're still not pumping gas.  I had an extra 20 gallons strapped to the back of the Honda when I went down and I got gas at what was probably the last available station before the power outages and it took me two hours of waiting in line to get my 16 gallons.  They wanted to fuss at me about the gas cans on the back of the car because they thought I wanted to fill those also, but I had filled them in PA before I went down. 

Yes but,  gasoline powered generators exist and most of the gasoline stores I know, in my neighborhood at least, have these things and gasoline could be pumped.   

If car batteries are not used as generators as 2nd and 3rd life in buildings, factories and homes, then we are crap out of luck... 

If solar powered roof tops are not a thing, then we are crap out of luck.   And it seems, when talking about an EV future, and talking about ICE bans, we are not exactly talking about actually implementing alternative power sources to help us out when the electrical grid goes out.   I guess its because, if we actually DO engineer a reliable solar, wind and battery back-up system like a Tesla power-wall, to power our homes, our businesses without "Big Electricity", then we wont need "Big Electricity"  then Big Electricity corporations wont exist...

Think about it.  

If my house, has a Tesla Power-wall, with a solar powered roof, enough battery tech to power my stuff inside my home, enough battery power with MORE than enough batteries that the solar roof I have installed ALWAYS keeps my batteries charged and the energy I use NEVER exceeds that usage, I will NEVER need Hydro-Quebec...

If battery tech advances so much as they say it will, even hospitals will NEVER need to use the corporate grid. 

But Im guessing THAT will never happen. Capitalism only works if there are businesses around to sell goods and services. Therefore, I do NOT see a future where humans will produce the energy they need to wane off of "Big Energy". 

So, we are forever gonna be stuck in this cycle of paying through the nose for energy.  

So...if we put ALL our eggs into one energy basket, we are gonna be far worse off than we are today...

 

 

[surreal1272]

On 9/5/2020 at 5:12 AM, ocnblu said:

Imagine the conversations in here if an ICE engine lost 40% of its capacity to function after 8 years or 100k miles, whichever came first.  That is GM's guideline for "normal operation" on Bolt's battery warranty.  And it's one of the better ones!  So lame.  And a potentially huge expense down the line, which points both fingers to the fact that EV are as throwaway as that Apple phone, but WAY, WAY more expensive.

It used to be, auto companies were planning obsolescence on the basis of body styling, primarily.  Then, yearly styling changes waned.

Now, with the average age of vehicles in the U.S. going up and up, planned obsolescence has pretty much been blunted with longer product cycles and improved long term mechanical quality/durability.

This warranty chart is a pathetic shine of light on manufacturer's expectations... a sad "new normal" of a vehicle's average lifespan, because c'mon man, nobody's going to replace a battery at their own expense, the car will be junked first.

If you are going to spout off about a 40% loss of battery capacity, make sure you state ALL the facts regarding that. 
 

“Early data shows a trend of reaching 150,000 miles before coming close to a 10% capacity loss, which is the minimum loss expected by GM under its warranty. Tesla’s battery and drivetrain warranty is for 8-year and with unlimited mileage.”

 

Source:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.co/2016/12/07/gm-chevy-bolt-ev-battery-degradation-up-to-40-warranty/amp/

 

And we know that keeping a car longer sure doesn’t matter to you, given your track record of car and truck ownership. 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2020 by surreal1272

[balthazar]

4 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

...since taxpayer money will fund this project of switching from ICE to EVs,

Let the lawmakers set (reasonable) future standards, let private enterprise rise to the standard and let the consumer make their own decision.
With the reputed "LESS PARTZ", and the general huge price tag of EVs, OEMs have a chance (in the future; not now) to make higher margins on EVs. Someday. There's the potential for motivation right there.

But spending massive, trillions of now-precious taxpayer money on 're-education' or whatever generally ineffective program Big Gov't manages to bungle into policy, is a horrible ROI right out of the gate.

[G. David Felt]

On 9/5/2020 at 2:12 AM, ocnblu said:

Imagine the conversations in here if an ICE engine lost 40% of its capacity to function after 8 years or 100k miles, whichever came first.  That is GM's guideline for "normal operation" on Bolt's battery warranty.  And it's one of the better ones!  So lame.  And a potentially huge expense down the line, which points both fingers to the fact that EV are as throwaway as that Apple phone, but WAY, WAY more expensive.

It used to be, auto companies were planning obsolescence on the basis of body styling, primarily.  Then, yearly styling changes waned.

Now, with the average age of vehicles in the U.S. going up and up, planned obsolescence has pretty much been blunted with longer product cycles and improved long term mechanical quality/durability.

This warranty chart is a pathetic shine of light on manufacturer's expectations... a sad "new normal" of a vehicle's average lifespan, because c'mon man, nobody's going to replace a battery at their own expense, the car will be junked first.

Hello ICE engines DO LOOSE HP and Torque by 100,000 miles. Some much worse than others especially on smaller engines like 3 & 4 cylinder. 

Bigger thing is the Amount of CO2 produced by ICE compared to EVs and there ICE looses every time.

https://duquark.com/2019/06/03/environmental-impacts-of-internal-combustion-engines-and-electric-battery-vehicles/

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2690/htm

Just some of the studies that show the metric tons of pollution ICE produce compared to EVs even with battery production and dirty energy supply like Coal or natural gas.

[ocnblu]

4 minutes ago, David said:

LOOSE HP

Well, we better round up those broncs then

[G. David Felt]

On 9/5/2020 at 2:31 PM, ocnblu said:

Sure, for first "owners" (no one wants to buy a car that will be obsolete in a year anymore) but what about the poor saps who fall victim as second owners?

Guess then all people buying CPO ICE auto's are SAPS since the electronics are very outdated, efficiency of said auto is pathetic and poor compared to current new year auto. ICE Auto's like EV's loose at least 25% depreciation once driven off the lot, so you should only use MASS TRANSIT since your a sap buying a new auto so often then.

On 9/5/2020 at 2:12 AM, ocnblu said:

Imagine the conversations in here if an ICE engine lost 40% of its capacity to function after 8 years or 100k miles, whichever came first.  That is GM's guideline for "normal operation" on Bolt's battery warranty.  And it's one of the better ones!  So lame.  And a potentially huge expense down the line, which points both fingers to the fact that EV are as throwaway as that Apple phone, but WAY, WAY more expensive.

It used to be, auto companies were planning obsolescence on the basis of body styling, primarily.  Then, yearly styling changes waned.

Now, with the average age of vehicles in the U.S. going up and up, planned obsolescence has pretty much been blunted with longer product cycles and improved long term mechanical quality/durability.

This warranty chart is a pathetic shine of light on manufacturer's expectations... a sad "new normal" of a vehicle's average lifespan, because c'mon man, nobody's going to replace a battery at their own expense, the car will be junked first.

Your as bad as our lying government as the extreme lies you state about EVs. WOW ?

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, David said:

ICE Auto's like EV's loose at least 25% depreciation once driven off the lot...

huh?

Just read a piece that said the average IC auto loses 39% in 3 yrs, compared to EVs which lose 52%.... with the Tesla 3 being the exception @ 10-15%.

[surreal1272]

18 minutes ago, balthazar said:

huh?

Just read a piece that said the average IC auto loses 39% in 3 yrs, compared to EVs which lose 52%.... with the Tesla 3 being the exception @ 10-15%.

And the reason for EV depreciation is pretty easy explain. From that piece you’re probably referring to,

 

”All of the electric models that lost the largest chunk of their original value are short-range models. One of the keys to success (and a signal of success) for the new long-range fully electric vehicles is that they escape the pull of strong depreciation. With the first Chevrolet Bolt EVs due to near that three-year mark early next year—and the new ones in their tax-credit phaseout—we’ll start getting some answers on whether that's the case in a matter of months”

[Drew Dowdell]

11 hours ago, balthazar said:

huh?

Just read a piece that said the average IC auto loses 39% in 3 yrs, compared to EVs which lose 52%.... with the Tesla 3 being the exception @ 10-15%.

EVs aren’t consistent enough to form any opinion. You basically have Teslas and you have the rolling penalty boxes that look like eggs. Shocker, the rolling penalty boxes that look like eggs have poor resale. The Versa Note and Chevy Spark have terrible resale also because they’re rolling penalty boxes that look like eggs.

But that’s the entire market of EVs right now, there is no middle ground like say an EV CR-V. So it’s pretty impossible to form any conclusions as to what an EV resale landscape will look like when more models come out.

[balthazar]

Sure, but this sort of thing is SOP; brand new models get graded as to resale & reliability when they've been on the market for a week.
I suppose the non-egg / non-Tesla EVs don't remotely sell in numbers capable of providing data (i-pace, e-tron, etc).

[balthazar]

Interesting article on EVs vs. the almighty state revenue stream (Norway). Someone, either the IC owner or the taxpayer (Hmmm, that would be the same person) is going to get hosed, in all likelyhood :

Quote

COPENHAGEN, Sept 7 (Reuters) - A rapid switch from to electric cars to meet Denmark's ambitious climate targets will leave a massive gap in its finances, a government commission said on Monday.

Moving to electric vehicles from those powered by fossil fuels is central to Denmark's goal of cutting emissions by 70% by 2030 and becoming climate neutral no later than 2050.

However, the Nordic country relies heavily on car and road taxes worth some 50 billion Danish crowns ($7.95 billion) a year, or 2.3% of GDP, to fund its welfare system.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-car-warning-signals-denmark-134208182.html

Edited September 7, 2020 by balthazar

[oldshurst442]

Electricity will be taxed (for income) just like gasoline is now,  making electricity less cheaper than it is now.  Maybe, making electricity just as pricey as gasoline is now.   Especially in European countries.  

Hydro-Quebec has fairly cheap electricity rates. Cheaper than most North American rates.  Quebec has fairly steep gasoline taxes. More than other North American places.  I KNOW electric rates WILL be going up when EVs start eating up ICe sales.   Quebec THRIVES on taxing their citizens...

Its inevitable. Its logical and frankly, its the only course of action for governments to keep the coffers full.  

 

Edited September 7, 2020 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

54 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Sure, but this sort of thing is SOP; brand new models get graded as to resale & reliability when they've been on the market for a week.
I suppose the non-egg / non-Tesla EVs don't remotely sell in numbers capable of providing data (i-pace, e-tron, etc).

Actually the resale numbers are skewed by a bunch of California qualifiers like the Fiat 500e (show of hands if anyone has actually seen on those in the wild) and short range “ugos” like the BMW i3. Long range EVs like the Tesla 3 seem to hold their values much better overall.

[USA-1]

On 9/6/2020 at 10:35 AM, Drew Dowdell said:

On a different tack, one of the only things that bothers me about the Avalanche is how un-green of a vehicle it is, slurping down gasoline at 16 miles per gallon.

However, the conversation we had here the other day about E85 made me do some figuring, and I think I'm just going to run E85 all the time from now on. It will cost an extra $125 every 10,000 miles to do it, but I think it's worth it in order to use a renewable fuel. Plus, of course, Moar Powah!

Also, by using E85, I will be using less than half the amount of petroleum that a Toyota Pruis would be.  In fact, a vehicle would have to achieve an average 83mpg to use as little petroleum as I do when running E85.

It is noticeably quicker on E85, my '09 Silverado 6.2L Flexfuel I had pulled harder up the hill I lived on when the loud pedal was smashed running E85 compared to even Premium 93. But like your chart shows she's a bit thirstier running on Ethanol -15. I would see single digit mpg avg. if I was out on a mission running errands. 

[Drew Dowdell]

22 hours ago, balthazar said:

Sure, but this sort of thing is SOP; brand new models get graded as to resale & reliability when they've been on the market for a week.
I suppose the non-egg / non-Tesla EVs don't remotely sell in numbers capable of providing data (i-pace, e-tron, etc).

They also haven't been on the market long enough to get any sort of temperature check.

21 hours ago, balthazar said:

Interesting article on EVs vs. the almighty state revenue stream (Norway). Someone, either the IC owner or the taxpayer (Hmmm, that would be the same person) is going to get hosed, in all likelyhood :

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-car-warning-signals-denmark-134208182.html

This is a bureaucratic problem, not an EV problem. Denmark put tax levies on petroleum powered cars and gave tax breaks to EVs in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Someone should have had the foresight to say, "Hey! When we reach our goal, we're going to have to adjust this."

Bad tax policy is not an EV's fault.

[Drew Dowdell]

10 hours ago, USA-1 said:

It is noticeably quicker on E85, my '09 Silverado 6.2L Flexfuel I had pulled harder up the hill I lived on when the loud pedal was smashed running E85 compared to even Premium 93. But like your chart shows she's a bit thirstier running on Ethanol -15. I would see single digit mpg avg. if I was out on a mission running errands. 

I'm not sure I notice a significant difference yet, but I'm still running totally stock.  It's also possible that you get a bigger bump in power with the 6.2 than I do with the 5.3.  I think a CAI and tune will come later in the year, right now I'm in the middle of shaking up my finances with a new bank, new primary credit card, and new savings/investing strategy... so I want that to settle down first before I make more extra purchases. 

[Robert Hall]

Interesting story...GM EVs are outselling Tesla in China.   That pink coupe is badazz...

https://jalopnik.com/gm-is-selling-more-evs-than-tesla-in-china-1844982463

[ccap41]

On 9/4/2020 at 3:54 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

If you can't afford an 8-year old Leaf, you can't afford a car. 

2013 Ford Focus Electric - $4,868 - 74k miles

2014 Chevrolet Spark Electric - $4,995 - 62k miles and more torque than my Avalanche(!!)

There are 189 EVs for under $7000 and under 75,000 miles available on AutoTrader right now.... so maybe we can move past the "EV's aren't affordable" trope. 

Unless your house is on an electrical panel pre-1990 (and I fully admit that many houses are), the cost to install at charger averages $1200.  It costs roughly $1,295 to fuel a Toyota Corolla for 1year/15,000 miles at 2.59 a gallon and 30 mpg average (local average price).

Charging at home costs so little per mile compared to fueling with gas, that ICE maintenance more than exceeds that cost.

Those EVs were originally rated well under 100 miles and you can almost guarantee they've lose some range in the 6-8 years they've been around. Those are hardly comparable to already owning a 90's-00's compact or mid-size sedan. 

[balthazar]

23 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

...for governments to keep the coffers full. 

Shockingly enough, that's not the purpose of 'government', but they've made it Job #1.

23 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Actually the resale numbers are skewed by a bunch of California qualifiers like the Fiat 500e (show of hands if anyone has actually seen on those in the wild) and short range “ugos” like the BMW i3. Long range EVs like the Tesla 3 seem to hold their values much better overall.

Actually, as the outlier, it's Tesla that's skewing the numbers. But that's more about brand there.

[USA-1]

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I'm not sure I notice a significant difference yet, but I'm still running totally stock.  It's also possible that you get a bigger bump in power with the 6.2 than I do with the 5.3.  I think a CAI and tune will come later in the year, right now I'm in the middle of shaking up my finances with a new bank, new primary credit card, and new savings/investing strategy... so I want that to settle down first before I make more extra purchases. 

That makes sense. Is it only 6 more hp with the 5.3 on E85? GM has it hard coded in ECM for mpg's over the 6.2 for sure. Even a tune and CAI in the 5.3 you won't get the response that the 6.2 does, but it still wakes her up, you can also disable V-4 and it sounds good with CAI. 

[G. David Felt]

EV News of the Day!

Elon Musk met with VW CEO and test drove the ID3 and found it to be a solid electric car.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/herbertdiess_we-are-ready-for-take-off-activity-6708652868141907968-QIIh

https://www.linkedin.com/embed/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6708652585454190592

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-elon-musk-met-volkswagen-chairman-diess-test-drive-id3-2020-9

https://electrek.co/2020/09/07/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-test-drive-vw-id3-video/

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-elon-musk-volkswagen-id3-test-drive-video/#:~:text=Fortunately%2C a video of Elon Musk’s Volkswagen ID.3,while the former was test driving the ID.3.

GM is investing in other EV Auto Companies as they bought an 11% stake in Nikola the Semi Truck maker and new Consumer Truck Maker. GM is also getting into Manufacturing with Nikola as they will help Nikola build their 900 HP Super Truck. GM will be their supplier for batteries, architecture, fuel cell systems and one of GM's mothballed factories will go to Nikola for use in the production of the Super Truck and Fuel Cell Semi Trucks. The first working prototypes will be shown this December 2020 and the Badger Super Truck will go on sale 2022.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/general-motors-acquires-11-stake-in-electric-truck-maker-nikola-2020-09-08

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2020-09-08/general-motors-acquires-11-stake-in-electric-truck-maker-nikola

https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/8/21427009/gm-nikola-acquisition-electric-hydrogen-truck

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nikola-and-gm-team-up-to-make-this-900-horsepower-super-electric-truck-113011979.html

 

 

 

[G. David Felt]

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

[G. David Felt]

Wow, Surprised @ocnblu has not popped in to comment.  

[trinacriabob]

8 hours ago, David said:

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

I like just about all of it except for the strong 45 degree angle at the rear door.  The sculpting in the front door is slightly Charger-esque, which is fine.  I like the grille.  But, gosh darn, I love that Ford grille I recently saw on a truck in a parking garage for a gym ... and I'm not usually fond of Ford products.

[Robert Hall]

The headlights remind me of Ford.. a bit of Ram Rebel in the grille.  Will be interesting to see how this proceeds---so will there be some commonality between this and the GM EV trucks?  Haven't read the article yet...sounds promising, though.    Very normal looking pickup, not sci-fi cray-cray like the Tesla Cybertruck. 

Edited September 9, 2020 by Robert Hall

[balthazar]

Don't care for the overwraught styling; too garish. What the hell is with the 'neon' tube along the side?? I also agree the giant triangular C-pillar is simply weird.

Edited September 9, 2020 by balthazar

[USA-1]

And you @David think the new Silverado 1500 is ugly? WOW. This smorgasbord of a monstrosity is all over the place, I see Chevy, Ford, Dodge and maybe even some Nissan Titan all Frankensteined together. 

I'm not anti-EV like you think, but I do think a truck should sound like a truck with a proper V8. I'd rather have the EREV 800 hp VIA XTRUX with the GM Voltec setup and still have a V8, best of both worlds.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2020 by USA-1

[balthazar]

NONE of them to date; Rivian, Atlis, Lordstown, Via, Nikola... are doing anything appearance-wise to pull any of the loyal truck buyers away from what they love.

[ocnblu]

Ram is the only truck company listening to their owners.  You heard it from the top at Ram.  So the focus remains true, and the product reflects that.  There is no dilution/weakening/sissifying of the product going on.

[surreal1272]

19 hours ago, David said:

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

Lots promise there but until there is an actual truck, I will reserve judgement on it. Certainly looks light years better than that abomination from Tesla. I also am not keen on the combination of electric and fuel cell tech. Seems overly complex and creates yet another barrier towards acceptance where fuel cell tech and infrastructure are concerned. 

[ccap41]

20 hours ago, David said:

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

I think it looks really good. I'd drive something that looks like that but there's nowhere to fill hydrogen around me...or anybody who isn't in California. 

[ccap41]

34 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Lots promise there but until there is an actual truck, I will reserve judgement on it. Certainly looks light years better than that abomination from Tesla. I also am not keen on the combination of electric and fuel cell tech. Seems overly complex and creates yet another barrier towards acceptance where fuel cell tech and infrastructure are concerned. 

Hydrogen is used as a generator like in the Honda Clarity, I believe. I don't think it is anymore complex than like a Volt where the engine is just used as a generator for the electric batteries...other than the fact it's hydrogen instead of gasoline. 

[A Horse With No Name]

20 hours ago, David said:

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

Ifr they can do a Colorado replacement/competitor, or something like the H3 SUT I am all in like stink on Horse crap. Getting my house paid off in a few more years, Horse wants another truck. This is fantastic. Some of what I like in Ford Super Duty front ends in this truck....a midsize version would look fantastic in my driveway next to my Ranger. Definite upvote. 

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Ram is the only truck company listening to their owners.  You heard it from the top at Ram.  So the focus remains true, and the product reflects that.  There is no dilution/weakening/sissifying of the product going on.

I do think Ford is actually doing a damn nice job also. But yes, RAM is making a fantastic product. 

7 hours ago, balthazar said:

NONE of them to date; Rivian, Atlis, Lordstown, Via, Nikola... are doing anything appearance-wise to pull any of the loyal truck buyers away from what they love.

Shoot me but I like the Rvian. Dislike the Lordstown. 

I think electric trucks will pull in a different class of buyer. Agree that I don't think you will see many in Wyoming...but in Suburban neighborhoods, hell yes. 

12 hours ago, David said:

Wow, Surprised @ocnblu has not popped in to comment.  

Give it time, things will become their usual (SH@t) show around here....just read any of the 11,397 threads from the last 12 years....they all read strangely the same. 

[ykX]

What bugs me the most as an engineer, as all these companies use Nicola Tesla name for their EVs, but he was a big proponent of AC current and designed AC motor, not DC batteries and DC motors they are using.  I don't think any of his ideas has to do anything with EV cars or trucks.

[surreal1272]

46 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Hydrogen is used as a generator like in the Honda Clarity, I believe. I don't think it is anymore complex than like a Volt where the engine is just used as a generator for the electric batteries...other than the fact it's hydrogen instead of gasoline. 

The last part is what I’m talking about. Hydrogen fuel cell tech is far more complex and more expensive to maintain if service is needed and now its being combined with another tech (electric) that also has a certain level of complexity when it comes to service (in relation to fixing any potential problems with it). We won’t even get into the infrastructure side of things where hydrogen is concerned. 

[G. David Felt]

While California and the 29 states that have adopted the CARB standards for their states are pushing for a faster move to EV's, it seems the Delivery companies are wanting to move even faster to EV delivery vans. Good read on all the changes coming in 2021 to UPS, FedEx, Amazon, USPS, etc. I have to say it looks like these 4 companies could reshape the EV industry in a far faster way than any of us thought.

I like this quote from the story:

“For us, it’s not just about making the wheels turn with a zero-emission vehicle,” said Scott Phillippi, UPS’s senior director of fleet maintenance and engineering, who envisions “Tesla-like” vehicles in the company’s vast fleet. “It’s about an integrated-technology vehicle - and that’s really what we’re pushing for.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-electric-delivery-focus-idUSKBN2601H8

https://uk.reuters.com/article/autos-electric-delivery/focus-pandemic-e-commerce-surge-spurs-race-for-tesla-like-electric-delivery-vans-idUKL1N2FZ1AZ

Dash of the new UPS Electric delivery Vans.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/focus-pandemic-e-commerce-surge-spurs-race-for-tesla-like-electric-delivery-vans-2020-09

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/pandemic-e-commerce-electric-delivery

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, ykX said:

What bugs me the most as an engineer, as all these companies use Nicola Tesla name for their EVs, but he was a big proponent of AC current and designed AC motor, not DC batteries and DC motors they are using.  I don't think any of his ideas has to do anything with EV cars or trucks.

Schlock Marketing 101.
Most consumers are too distracted by meaningless minutia to ponder much critically.

[oldshurst442]

Am I missing something?

I do not know about the other motors in the other brands.  But knowing that Nicola Tesla invented the 3 phase induction motor and that Elon’s Tesla car company’s motor IS in fact a 3 phase induction motor, producin’ AC current, I think Tesla the company is a very appropriate name.  

[Robert Hall]

Nikola and Tesla are two separate companies and brand names.  Any correlation to a historical figure named 'Nikola Tesla' is coincidental, though likely intentional for marketing purposes.   

Edited September 9, 2020 by Robert Hall

[ykX]

40 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Am I missing something?

I do not know about the other motors in the other brands.  But knowing that Nicola Tesla invented the 3 phase induction motor and that Elon’s Tesla car company’s motor IS in fact a 3 phase induction motor, producin’ AC current, I think Tesla the company is a very appropriate name.  

You are correct, my bad.  The first roadster, Model S and X used AC induction motors.  They had DC batteries and inverter for the motors.  But starting with Model 3 they switched to permanent magnet DC motors.  I forgot.

Funny, is that our local EV expert and guru didn't correct me ...

Edited September 9, 2020 by ykX

[G. David Felt]

18 minutes ago, ykX said:

You are correct, my bad.  The first roadster, Model S and X used AC induction motors.  They had DC batteries and inverter for the motors.  But starting with Model 3 they switched to permanent magnet DC motors.  I forgot.

Funny, is that our local EV expert and guru didn't correct me ...

If ya talking about me, I was working making money, so just now reading through this. Plus I am not the only one here that knows a thing or two about EV's. I clearly do not consider myself an expert, but thank you.  

[A Horse With No Name]

My favorite car, with good battery technology. Still love the original Mustang Fastback. 

[Robert Hall]

Lucid has a reveal this evening of the production version of the Air.

https://www.lucidmotors.com/

[riviera74]

5 hours ago, David said:

While California and the 29 states that have adopted the CARB standards for their states are pushing for a faster move to EV's, it seems the Delivery companies are wanting to move even faster to EV delivery vans. Good read on all the changes coming in 2021 to UPS, FedEx, Amazon, USPS, etc. I have to say it looks like these 4 companies could reshape the EV industry in a far faster way than any of us thought.

I like this quote from the story:

“For us, it’s not just about making the wheels turn with a zero-emission vehicle,” said Scott Phillippi, UPS’s senior director of fleet maintenance and engineering, who envisions “Tesla-like” vehicles in the company’s vast fleet. “It’s about an integrated-technology vehicle - and that’s really what we’re pushing for.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-electric-delivery-focus-idUSKBN2601H8

https://uk.reuters.com/article/autos-electric-delivery/focus-pandemic-e-commerce-surge-spurs-race-for-tesla-like-electric-delivery-vans-idUKL1N2FZ1AZ

Dash of the new UPS Electric delivery Vans.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/focus-pandemic-e-commerce-surge-spurs-race-for-tesla-like-electric-delivery-vans-2020-09

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/pandemic-e-commerce-electric-delivery

Of course they are enthusiastic.  Have you seen their gas bills?

[oldshurst442]

On 9/8/2020 at 1:39 PM, David said:

I have to say that the Nikola Badger Super truck is a nice looking truck and solid competitor to the RAM which I have felt is one of the best looking trucks out there.

What do you all think of the Badger EV fuel cell Truck? Nikola has now stated there will be two versions.

• 455 HP / 980 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 910 hp / 1,960 lb-ft of torque AWD
• 300 miles on battery pack and 300 miles on Fuel cell generator.

@Robert Hall @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell @balthazar @A Horse With No Name @surreal1272 @trinacriabob @riviera74 @oldshurst442

So what do you guys think of their concept above now that they have an updated actual truck? Do you think it will make it as is to when they reveal their fleet of Mules in December?

Thoughts of GM investment in Nikola and the manufacturing plant that Nikola is getting to build the Badger Truck along with using GM's platform?

Sounds off please.  

 

As far as concepts go, this is awesome.  It meets the criteria of a concept of being over-the -top.    If they tone it down a tad, but not too much, I think it works and blends in with what Ford, Dodge and Chevy/GMC are doing.   So much so, that I think this truck blends all 3 D3 trucks elements in its styling.

The hood reminds me of a Silverado/Sierra.  OK...indentation versus bump...but still a hood stamping of some sort. 

 

The grille of a RAM

and the  contouring " [    ] "  style LED  lights of an F-150 

 

I hate the blue neon thing.  

I actually like that weird triangular C pillar,  but I admit, it would probably look 1000 times better had it been a square instead. 

 

Good for GM in...following in the footsteps of Ford with Rivian.  But more to  it than that...

GREAT for GM for trying to cash in with the ridiculous stock appraisals that EV start-ups get because GM would NEVER get that kind of stock gains.  Wallstreet a$$holes prefer to inflate start-up stock prices because there is literally trillions of dollars to be made trading from this EV thing.  Its just a way for Wallstreet to make money and less about the product...   Therefore, if GM invests in a start-up like this, GM can also benefit from the cash that is about to be splurged...  

 

 

 

[ccap41]

This seems like something that could or would benefit nearly everybody. It seems like a fantastic idea and I'm pretty surprised it is just now being "invented" or maybe just not being executed. 

https://www.motortrend.com/news/wheeltug-airplane-taxi-motor-ev-technology/

" With a novel electric AC induction motor driving a plane's nose-gear wheels, considerable time can be saved during pushback, taxiing, and even passenger loading. And here's the hook that for electric cars or trucks: the motor's unique design can deliver enough torque to get a 200,000-lbs aircraft rolling while providing light weight and high performance at higher taxiing speeds. In essence, it emulates a gearless "virtual transmission."

 

The motor's innovative winding allows its controller to vary the number of phases, magnetic poles, and alternating current frequency—for example, from the typical AC three-phase, to as many as 12 or 18. This allows it to efficiently deliver the torque of a DC permanent magnet motor while providing the lighter weight, lower cost, and improved performance of an AC-induction motor at higher operating speeds.

Flying Hybrids Mean Big Savings

If this all rings a faint bell among our longtime readers, that's because we covered the technology in a November, 2008 Technologue column titled "Flying Hybrids!" The "mesh-connected windings" and "fundamental harmonics" at play in this motor were developed by Gibraltar-based Chorus Motors, which has been patiently working to commercialize the technology via its subsidiary WheelTug since well before that 2008 column. Company CEO Isaiah Cox is now reasonably certain final flight certification will be granted by the end of 2021, with new production and retrofit installations beginning in early 2022. A grand demonstration is scheduled at the Memphis International Airport in mid-September.

WheelTug has been demonstrated on airplanes large (Boeing 767) and small (737), with electricity always coming from the standard auxiliary power unit (no batteries need be added). Now the company is targeting shorter-haul narrow-body aircraft like the 737 and Airbus A320. Here's how WheelTug promises to save fuel and time on a typical flight:

 

 

• Eliminate the wait for "wing-walkers" and a tug operator to arrive, connect the tug to the nose gear, attach the communications link, and push back.
• Eliminate the time to disconnect the above and clear ramp personnel and vehicles from the area.
• Begin taxiing immediately, with no need to hold for jet-blast reasons.
• Start engines only in time to warm them before takeoff.
• Land and almost immediately shut off the engines, allowing them (and the brakes) to cool en route to the gate so that ground crew can begin servicing/collecting luggage immediately upon arrival.
• Taxi right up to the gate, with no need for tow-in.

WheelTug pegs the average fuel savings at 36 gallons per flight and a time savings at 8.5 minutes in push-back alone, but more important is the higher predictability of all the time spent on the ground. Today push-back takes 13 minutes or more on two percent of flights, so total scheduled flight time must "bake in" extra time to preserve the airline's "on-time" reputation. (Note that time spent with engines idling during de-icing procedures aren't included in these estimates.)

To these, WheelTug forecasts further savings of $100 per flight for push-back fees and $95 in engine wear, while greatly reducing the opportunity for foreign-object damage from detritus sucked in off the runway and collisions caused by tug operators (aircraft movement is still directed from a tower, but the pilot remains in control while monitoring cameras views that afford complete situational awareness). And planes able to push back and taxi themselves will lose far less time "recovering" from weather delays that place a high demand on a limited number of tug vehicles and ramp personnel. "

Edited September 10, 2020 by ccap41