Sounds like Stellantis is on the right path.

ThundahBeagle

Well-known member
I'm no expert in any of this but what I simply do not get is why even try to market a half ton, or any consumer truck, to pull 14k? Just makes no sense. 99% of half ton buyers are never going to tow more than half that. Anyone who wants to tow that is never going to buy a truck that small.
3/4 ton for 14000 lbs
 

ThundahBeagle

Well-known member
I have been around properly taken care of vehicles that are still running at well over 400000 miles, my DD big block suburban has 175000+ and I wouldn't be afraid to drive it to the arctic circle tomorrow, take care of your vehicles and they usually take care of you
I'm not trying to jinx myself here but I am daily-ing a 9 year old Sierra with 185k on it. I dont know that I would be comfortable driving anything but new from here to the Arctic, but I roll out 500 miles a week on this thing. Yes I've had to do a lot of maintenance and the transmission gave me expensive trouble recently, but she still moves well.
 

ThundahBeagle

Well-known member
Yes, advanced economies should encourage development. Not the doubling and tripling down on outdated technology to ensure the wealth of a small portion of the planet while betraying the rest of humanity.

My point is, drilling, pumping, piping refining, hauling and dispensing gasoline is very energy intensive. Then at least 60% of that “produced” energy is wasted as heat, noise and friction. Then we dump the emissions in the atmosphere and call ourselves advanced.
Is there not, then, a cost with strip mining or fracking (by another name) and processing lithium? Making the batteries? Not saying i dont like this idea per se but if you are going to draw it all out like that it should be done across the board. And I dont know the answer. I'd like to, though.
 

tacollie

Glamper
It actually did meet both stated ranges for towing and normal driving. All around an excellent truck other than the towing range (125 miles with my 7000lb travel trailer). I’d buy an electric all day everyday over my current 3500 diesel if it could go 300 miles while towing and charge in less than 30 minutes.
Where were you towing? I'm just curious. My buddy was pulling a 3500 camper on a trip through Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and Nevada with his Rivian. He said it towed great but the range was often below 100 miles. His other big complaint was a lot of fast charging stations aren't set up for people with trailers which meant he would have block traffic flow in parking lots. He has since sold the Rivian and bought a Frontier.
 

crazysccrmd

Observer
Where were you towing? I'm just curious. My buddy was pulling a 3500 camper on a trip through Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and Nevada with his Rivian. He said it towed great but the range was often below 100 miles. His other big complaint was a lot of fast charging stations aren't set up for people with trailers which meant he would have block traffic flow in parking lots. He has since sold the Rivian and bought a Frontier.

All over Colorado. The 126 miles is running it from 100% to nearly zero and my doable if arriving at a fast charger or your campsite if it has 50amp rv connections to charge from.
 
Is there not, then, a cost with strip mining or fracking (by another name) and processing lithium? Making the batteries? Not saying i dont like this idea per se but if you are going to draw it all out like that it should be done across the board. And I dont know the answer. I'd like to, though.
Lithium and all the constituent minerals in EV batteries are used in many other products we use. These materials are not consumed in a battery, once a pack is passed it’s useful life all the same materials are still there and can be reused.

The materials are valuable enough to ensure they are recycled, unlike plastics recycling. Essentially the whole battery is ground up and materials are separated in various ways. There are already several companies in the US doing this, Redwood Material probably the most known.

Given these materials can be used over and over the pressure on mining will eventually subside. As well as through technology some materials will be obsolete and or cheaper elements used. For instance cobalt is being used much less in new batteries but is still used in drill bits, glass, crayons etc.

Electricity can be produced in a hundred different ways. Hydrocarbons are mined pumped strip mined or fracked and burned once. Thermal efficiency is very low and we all have to deal with the emissions.
 

rruff

Explorer
Is there not, then, a cost with strip mining or fracking (by another name) and processing lithium? Making the batteries? Not saying i dont like this idea per se but if you are going to draw it all out like that it should be done across the board. And I dont know the answer. I'd like to, though.
"Some of Thacker Pass’s proponents believe that would result in fewer costs and less damage from mining. Anyone who deals with lithium is, on some level, aware of the environmental costs. The recovery process produces pollutants like heavy metals, sucks up water, and emits tons of greenhouse gases. By one estimate, fitting a new electric vehicle with its lithium battery can result in upwards of 70 percent more carbon emissions than building an equivalent petrol-powered car (although the average electric car will more than make up the difference with day-to-day use)."


Future batteries may very well not be lithium based. The tech is still pretty new, so I'd expect big research budgets and big improvements and changes going forward. And the question regarding the economic viability of solar and wind generated electricity is storage. I think if we get smart with our grid, people can use the excess capacity of their cars as a storage medium to some extent. As always, using less energy to get the same task done, should be getting more attention than it is.

Someone mentioned diesel earlier, and since gasoline and diesel are necessary byproducts of the refining process, we will get both whenever we get either. Demand will be controlled by price... as it has been for a very long time. That's the only reason why diesel is more expensive than gas, and it will get relatively more expensive as demand for gas declines. That makes using a gasoline engine on a series hybrid the sensible choice... and maybe in the future a turbine, or something else entirely?

Frankly I think it's pretty insane that would got away from rail transport. That is quite a bit more efficient than trucking, and would lend itself to alternative methods... like maybe providing electric power to the rails?
 
"Some of Thacker Pass’s proponents believe that would result in fewer costs and less damage from mining. Anyone who deals with lithium is, on some level, aware of the environmental costs. The recovery process produces pollutants like heavy metals, sucks up water, and emits tons of greenhouse gases. By one estimate, fitting a new electric vehicle with its lithium battery can result in upwards of 70 percent more carbon emissions than building an equivalent petrol-powered car (although the average electric car will more than make up the difference with day-to-day use)."


Future batteries may very well not be lithium based. The tech is still pretty new, so I'd expect big research budgets and big improvements and changes going forward. And the question regarding the economic viability of solar and wind generated electricity is storage. I think if we get smart with our grid, people can use the excess capacity of their cars as a storage medium to some extent. As always, using less energy to get the same task done, should be getting more attention than it is.

Someone mentioned diesel earlier, and since gasoline and diesel are necessary byproducts of the refining process, we will get both whenever we get either. Demand will be controlled by price... as it has been for a very long time. That's the only reason why diesel is more expensive than gas, and it will get relatively more expensive as demand for gas declines. That makes using a gasoline engine on a series hybrid the sensible choice... and maybe in the future a turbine, or something else entirely?

Frankly I think it's pretty insane that would got away from rail transport. That is quite a bit more efficient than trucking, and would lend itself to alternative methods... like maybe providing electric power to the rails?
This is a subject that can be talked about for months.

Essentially “life cycle” emissions is what you are referring to. There is so much mud in online “data” depending on where you start counting.

Here is a clearish representation
1702835529238.jpeg

The big caveat here is that battery minerals and chemistry are always developing. More and more EV batteries are using specific chemistries for specific use cases.

Also electricity production is rapidly getting cleaner. Many of us are producing much of our own electricity, and many more would be if not for cheaply manipulated politicians. But that’s a whole other subject too.
 

NevadaLover

Forking Icehole
Gale Banks is showing the U.S. military how to repower the remaining HMMWV fleet with a hybrid powerplant featuring a 3 liter turbo diesel engine and 800 volt battery, looks like even the military realizes that 100% battery power isn't feasible yet and wants to look at other options.
 

crazysccrmd

Observer
Gale Banks is showing the U.S. military how to repower the remaining HMMWV fleet with a hybrid powerplant featuring a 3 liter turbo diesel engine and 800 volt battery, looks like even the military realizes that 100% battery power isn't feasible yet and wants to look at other options.

It’s an interesting concept. I wouldn’t put any special emphasis on how even the military realizes 100% battery power isn’t feasible though. It’s obvious that a vehicle intended for potentially remote and austere operations can’t rely on having an electric power plant available. Thats totally different than the average American who parks at home every night to charge and only drives 60 miles a day.
 

NevadaLover

Forking Icehole
It’s an interesting concept. I wouldn’t put any special emphasis on how even the military realizes 100% battery power isn’t feasible though. It’s obvious that a vehicle intended for potentially remote and austere operations can’t rely on having an electric power plant available. Thats totally different than the average American who parks at home every night to charge and only drives 60 miles a day.

The average American can probably benefit from a plug-in EV, never denied that, but for a good portion of us Americans, like the military, a plug-in EV will simply not do what we need our vehicles to do.

Long road trips, towing heavy loads, hauling multiple people and pets, etc... while being able to do so without stopping frequently to wait to recharge and hoping there is a place to recharge before the batteries run out, is an absolute requirement for so many tax paying Americans.

That's what makes the ramcharger an interesting development!
 

JaSAn

Grumpy Old Man
. . . Thats totally different than the average American who parks at home every night to charge and only drives 60 miles a day.
I know of only a couple of people (mostly retired) that that is true for. That might be true 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year, and don't have kids to haul around to activities after school. But most of us cannot afford a dedicated commute vehicle. We need something that will do multiple things besides short trips:
  • hauling a trailer to a remote campsite on a weekend.
  • taking the kids on a 2+ week vacation to see National Parks.
  • Going to a distant event with lots of others in a location with only a few 240V charge stations.
  • Opening fishing sees lots of double tows (a 5th wheel and 16+ ft. boat). Ever try to get one of those into a charge station.
  • I wonder how many EVs a campground can charge at a time with lots of air conditioners running.
I applaud the military for pushing the hybrid technology forward. Because until fast chargers become as ubiquitous as gas pumps, EV's won't work for the majority of people I know.
 

crazysccrmd

Observer
I know of only a couple of people (mostly retired) that that is true for. That might be true 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year, and don't have kids to haul around to activities after school. But most of us cannot afford a dedicated commute vehicle. We need something that will do multiple things besides short trips:
  • hauling a trailer to a remote campsite on a weekend.
  • taking the kids on a 2+ week vacation to see National Parks.
  • Going to a distant event with lots of others in a location with only a few 240V charge stations.
  • Opening fishing sees lots of double tows (a 5th wheel and 16+ ft. boat). Ever try to get one of those into a charge station.
  • I wonder how many EVs a campground can charge at a time with lots of air conditioners running.
I applaud the military for pushing the hybrid technology forward. Because until fast chargers become as ubiquitous as gas pumps, EV's won't work for the majority of people I know.

There’s definite use cases an EV doesn’t excel at and that’s why I sold my Rivian. For those that only want one vehicle it’s a decision to make on whether 48 weeks a year of hassle free and very cheap driving is worth the added hassle of an infrequent roadtrip. Aside from towing a road trip in an EV isn’t hard, just means 30 minute charge stops instead of 10 minute gas stops.
 

plainjaneFJC

Deplorable
Yes, advanced economies should encourage development. Not the doubling and tripling down on outdated technology to ensure the wealth of a small portion of the planet while betraying the rest of humanity.

My point is, drilling, pumping, piping refining, hauling and dispensing gasoline is very energy intensive. Then at least 60% of that “produced” energy is wasted as heat, noise and friction. Then we dump the emissions in the atmosphere and call ourselves advanced.
“Ensure the wealth of a small portion of the planet while betraying the rest of humanity” Is that a slogan on the bosses t-shirt at the cobalt mine?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,210
Messages
2,903,819
Members
229,665
Latest member
SANelson
Top