Ford's CEO says that large EV truck are currently not feasible

[DeaneG]

Same opinion as Peter Rawlinson:

https://insideevs.com/news/749756/ford-large-ev-trucks-have-unresolvable-problems/

 

[Buffalo Bob]

Great! Another reason for Wall Street to hammer my boatload of Ford stock after posting a stellar quarterly performance. Applying sound financial analysis to stock picking is a fool's errand. Ugh! He should have just said that they were gonna build AI into every truck. When will I ever learn?

Sorry. Please don't let my rant turn this thread off-topic. I'm really just having fun grousing.

 

[Ughwhy]

I think the concept of "right sizing" the battery for the majority of a person's use habits makes a lot of sense with today's battery technology and cost. According to Google AI, the average American drives only 13,596 miles a year, so about 30 miles a day. Yet 200+ miles seems to be the minimum range expectation for most EV's, and most are targeting 400+ miles of range. So for many EV buyers, they end up with a lot more battery capacity (and therefore cost and weight) than they need for their average day, that they are carrying around just to deal with the occasional trips where they need that extra range. If an on-board ICE Generator lets you deal with that occasional non-average day, or long distance trip, for less weight and cost than the equivalent battery capacity, then it is possibly a good alternative (at least until batteries get cheaper and more efficient/lighter). An onboard ICE generator also potentially solves range anxiety.

My step-mother has a BMW X5 that also has a small battery allowing her to get about 50 miles on a full charge. She will often go about five or six months between needing to refuel because she charges the BMW at home every day and most days 50 miles covers her driving needs (so during that time, the six cylinder ICE engine is largely irrelevant). However, she and my Father, about 2 times a year, will drive from central California to Oregon (about a 9 hour drive), and most of the time they take her car. On those trips the battery is largely irrelevant.

If an ICE generator could provide that same sort of occasional flexibility, then it may be the way to go for now. This appears to be the strategy Ram is taking with its new Ram 1500 Ramcharger. It has both a v6 ICE (that they rate as a 130-kilowatt generator) and a 92-kilowatt-hour battery pack. Combined they are advertising 690 miles of range. I suspect that the 3.6L V-6 in that is more than what someone would need for a vehicle that didn't need to do truck things (it has a payload capacity of 2,625lbs and a towing capacity of 14,000lbs). I wonder how small of an ICE generator you could get away with for a mid-sized sedan?

I also don't know what the target is for generator output; does the generator need to be strong enough to operate the vehicle without any contribution from the battery, or are you running out of battery at the same time you run out of gas? Asked another way: for the Ramcharger, when you reach that 690 miles and have depleted the battery and gasoline, can you just refuel it like a normal ICE vehicle and continue your trip, or would you also need to charge the battery? If you only need to refuel it, what is the range is for that next leg where the battery isn't really contributing?

Ram isn't really implementing what I am talking about since they are using a full size engine and a full size battery pack (compared to the fully electric Ford Lightning where the battery pack has between 98 to 131 kWh of capacity). What would be interesting to know is in a sedan, what the "sweet spot" would be for a smaller battery pack that aims to cover ~70% of a persons average driving needs, and a smaller ICE generator that allows the sedan to deal with trips in that remaining 30% of the person's atypical needs. How much smaller, lighter, and cheaper could the Ramcharger's battery pack and engine have been if it didn't need to do truck things and targeted a max range of 490 miles instead of 690?

Of course what you save in battery cost and weight you gain in the cost and weight of the ICE generator and fuel tank, plus you ad complexity and undercut the reliability of electric vs ICE.

 

[DeaneG]

...If an ICE generator could provide that same sort of occasional flexibility, then it may be the way to go for now. This appears to be the strategy Ram is taking with its new Ram 1500 Ramcharger. It has both a v6 ICE (that they rate as a 130-kilowatt generator) and a 92-kilowatt-hour battery pack....

I've been tempted by BWM and Volvo's excellent PHEV SUVs. But having owned an RX400h hybrid for a dozen years, I'd just as soon leave all ICE behind if I can. It can't be right to carry two complete, heavy drivetrains around in a vehicle.

 

[Ughwhy]

I've been tempted by BWM and Volvo's excellent PHEV SUVs. But having owned an RX400h hybrid for a dozen years, I'd just as soon leave all ICE behind if I can. It can't be right to carry two complete, heavy drivetrains around in a vehicle.

Yeah how much added cost and weight are people carrying to be able to deal with the rare event?

 

[Buffalo Bob]

What amazes me is the size of many PHEV batteries relative to the pure EV range they get. I understand the 'cover your commute with electric', as most PHEVs seem to have about a 20-30 mile pure electric range, but the size of the battery for that measily distance suggests an awful number of miles/kWh.

 

[cgm9999]

I mean, Farley's not wrong, but it's a bit short-sighted. Then again, this is exactly the stance I'd expect of Ford, which like many other major automotive businesses, are highly risk averse and can't be bothered to actually do the hard work to build an innovative product that creates demand. Instead, they'd rather let someone else take the risk and copy their success, albeit at a much smaller share than to invest the R&D it takes to run the table. While this conservative approach will please old Ford shareholders today, it will only make them more and more irrelevant in the automotive space in the coming years.

Far from me to tell Ford what to do with their business model, but it's this attitude that will continue to cement them as a follower and not an innovator in the automotive space. As most of us on this forum know, EV technology is still nascent and there remains a ton of innovation that will change the economics of building EVs (on the manufacturing side) and buying EVs (on the consumer side), all sooner than later, no less.

In five years, I expect significant increases in energy density in batteries, faster charging rates, more public chargers, etc. will only entice more and more people to go EV. Farley's statement reads as someone hedging their bets and taking their foot of the gas (accelerator?) of EV tech investment based solely upon a short term downturn in demand.

 

[Steveinarizona]

I've been tempted by BWM and Volvo's excellent PHEV SUVs. But having owned an RX400h hybrid for a dozen years, I'd just as soon leave all ICE behind if I can. It can't be right to carry two complete, heavy drivetrains around in a vehicle.

I used to drive BMW PHEVs. They did drive nicely but nothing like my EV. But they are a nice alternative for someone who has to do a lot of long distance driving.