Tags
2022, 2024, 4WD, barack obama, charging stations, D/S/Cs, EV future, EVs, Ford F-150 Lightning, high fuel prices, joe biden, political promise expiration date, Tesla, U Haul
Ford F-150 Lighting: everybody is going to demand one!
I took a summer trip last week, across a part of Wyoming and almost all of South Dakota—widthwise. It was about 500 miles—seven hours—and much of it was interstate highway. In WY and SD, on the interstates, the speed limit is–mostly–80 MPH, which helps a great deal and is yet another glorious feature of Normal America.
This time of year is tourist season, a substantial part of the economy of Wyoming and South Dakota, so the highways were clogged with pickups pulling enormous camping trailers, enormous motor homes usually pulling an SUV, SUVs full of people with luggage carriers on the top pulling trailers of various types, and people in all manner of vehicles who obviously consider 80 MPH synonymous with certain death. As a result, I was only able to maintain 80 MPH for a few miles at a stretch before having to slow down 20 MPH or more to get in line behind slow people passing even slower people. Sigh.
I was driving my lovely 2016 Ford F150, 4WD pickup truck–a ubiquitous and very useful type of vehicle in Flyover Country–and because I was helping move my nephew to a new job, pulling a U-Haul motorcycle trailer. The cab was full of people, the bed was full of stuff, and the trailer was full of a motorcycle and other stuff. Even so, the 325 HP, twin turbo V6 easily maintained 80 MPH. Of course, I would never think of going a single MPH faster. That would be wrong.
And therein lie the essential elements of this article. With only two aboard, I can manage as much as 22 MPG—sometimes a bit more—on the highway, which isn’t bad at all for a full sized 4WD pickup. They’re far lighter—aluminum body—and more aerodynamic than pickups of even a decade ago, but that’s still a lot of mass and frontal area. Loaded with people and the stuff of daily life as the truck was, I experienced about a 30% reduction in mileage, and a bit less than that on the way back because of ridiculously strong head and head/side winds, which is par for the course in WY and SD.
Most notable was the insanely high price of fuel, ranging from 288.9 to 302.9. The stations I patronized weren’t really gouging either. (some neighborhood gas stations were only about 6-8 cents cheaper). This is, since Joe Biden took office, an increase of about a dollar per gallon—in only about five months! Of course, he took steps to end America’s systemically racist, white supremacist, domestic terrorist/insurrectionist energy independence on his very first day in office. Obviously, we can’t have that kind of national security/racial identity threat. In real terms, nearly filling the tank was about $60.00. I can’t afford much of that; neither can most Americans.
Another interesting and pleasant feature of Wyoming and South Dakota, as well as many heartland states, is the distance between towns and cities. In North Texas, where Mrs. Manor and I lived for two decades, the end of the city limits of one town is the beginning of the city limits of the next. Not so in much of America, where one can drive 70 miles or more between towns. It’s all rolling prairie or farm/ranch land, which is a good reminder where things like food come from. Plastic-wrapped hamburger doesn’t grow in Central Park.
Gas stations were full of people from all over America, and race, gender and politics had no apparent effect on gas pump sticker shock. When the pumps clicked off, I saw—and heard—reactions ranging from a Lurch-like muttering and solemn shaking of the head, to outright profanity. I even heard Joe Biden’s name vehemently taken in vain! More than once! Americans are not amused, and as gas prices continue to rise to $4.00 per gallon and beyond, Democrats/Socialists/Communists, if there is any justice left in this divided land, are going to pay at the polls in 2022 and 2024. That is, if they’re not able to cheat at their new, unprecedented levels.
With this as background, let us once again visit the wonderful world of electric vehicles, which as their proponents tell us—the idiots just won’t shut up—is the future, the very near future. We begin with a quick note from Reuters. Note, please, this was dated 10-22-20:
Joe Biden’s campaign has privately told U.S. miners it would support boosting domestic production of metals used to make electric vehicles, solar panels and other products crucial to his climate plan, according to three sources familiar with the matter, in a boon for the mining industry.
How about that! Before he was cheated into office, he was all for American miners, but only to the degree they could help him make his EV delusions come true. Now let’s visit Reuters again, this time on 05-25-21, well into the Biden/Harris/Whoever Administration–Joe Biden, Temporary President.
U.S. President Joe Biden will rely on ally countries to supply the bulk of the metals needed to build electric vehicles and focus on processing them domestically into battery parts, part of a strategy designed to placate environmentalists, two administration officials with direct knowledge told Reuters.
The plans will be a blow to U.S. miners who had hoped Biden would rely primarily on domestically sourced metals, as his campaign had signaled last autumn, to help fulfill his ambitions for a less carbon-intensive economy.
How about that! Obviously, Joe learned from his best buddy Barack: every political promise has an expiration date, though with Joe, a bit quicker than with Barack. Tough luck miners and America! You f***ed up; you trusted Joe! He’s still going all in for “fighting climate change,” he’s just all in with enriching our foreign adversaries and enemies instead of Americans. I guess that’s what “building back better” means. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a POTUS that actually worked in America’s interests?
According to Electrek.co, Ford plans to have 40% of its offerings all electric by 2030. Take the link if you want to see what fairy dust and unicorn fart EV cheerleading looks like. But to continue the point of this article, let’s see how Ford’s soon to be electric F-150 compares with my pedestrian, gas-powered F-150. Fox News reports:
The F-150 Lightning will come standard with a 230-mile range rating and be offered in an extended range version that can go 300 miles between charges and gets the maximum 10,000-pound rating, but without anything attached to the back of it.
Uh-huh. That “extended range version” has a much bigger and heavier battery pack. Oh, did I mention it costs lots of thousands more?
Ford hasn’t yet said how towing or hauling the F-150 Lightning’s maximum 2,000 payload will affect range, but energy is energy and internal combustion engine vehicles offer an idea.
Hmmm. I wonder why Ford hasn’t mentioned that as yet? Surely they’ve tried puling trailers and took measurements? Remember I lost about 30% of my mileage towing a loaded trailer with a fully loaded vehicle and three passengers.
The weight and shape of whatever is being towed can make a dramatic difference on fuel economy, not to mention the road being driven on. Just picture the difference between a cabin cruiser getting hauled to a mountain lake compared to an Airstream trailer cruising through Kansas.
Ah! Honesty! Where motor vehicles are concerned, range is a function of many factors. There are, however, three main ways to get better range in fueled vehicles: 1) make them lighter; 2) make them more aerodynamic; 3) make the engines, through engineering and computer controls, more efficient. The first two factors apply to EVs. For the third, making batteries more efficient is the trick, but physics keeps getting in the way. It seems batteries can only be so powerful, last so long, and store so much energy. But any vehicle, fueled or juiced, is affected by terrain and altitude. Traversing the rolling hills of WY or SD is going to take a toll on range, far more than traversing Kansas.
Typically, a truck sees at least a 30% drop in fuel economy when pulling 10,000 pounds, though it can be more than 50% in some situations, according to tests by PickupTrucks.com.
In fact, startup electric truck maker Rivian, in which Ford holds a $500 million stake, says that its R1T pickup will see a 50% drop in efficiency when towing a trailer at its maximum 11,000-pound rating.
That means F-150 Lightning owners can likely expect to make it 150 to 210 miles between charges with the extended battery.
Remember that’s the very heavy and expensive extended battery version. The normal version is going to get 115 miles of range under those conditions. And, of course, even that’s nonsense. That kind of calculation is a best case, ideal condition sort of scenario. The actual range for any version is going to be less, probably much less. Using frivolous accessories like lights, air conditioning/heating, windshield wipers and anything else that requires electricity is going to also dramatically reduce range. Want to charge your cell phone? Wave goodbye to five miles of range. The extra weight and drag of a 4WD version is also going to hammer range.
This is assuming, of course, that they started with a full battery. The F-150 Lightning is capable of being recharged at a public fast charging station from 15% to 80% full in 41 minutes, but the process slows down for the last 20% to protect the cells from overheating, so drivers may not want to wait around to top it all the way off during a road trip.
Ah! More honesty—sort of. On our trip, we stopped to refuel in Wall, SD and Chamberlain, SD. In each city, there was a bank of seven or so proprietary Tesla chargers. At each place, only a single Tesla vehicle was charging. It took me about 10 minutes to refuel. The Teslas were there before we arrived, and still there when we left. That 41 minute figure is also optimistic. In reality, if there is a charger available when and where one needs it, two hours and more is a far more realistic expectation, and that’s just to get an 80% charge, and only if the charging device is a super duper fast charger, or considering our F-150 Lightning towing a trailer, maybe just enough range to get to the next charging station—if one exists. Keep in mind the Tesla banks were on the major east/west route through SD. It’s highly unlikely there are any charging stations on anything other than that kind of road in most of America.
But what about that brave, new EV future where there are charging stations everywhere? Imagine having to wait in line for hours to get to a charger only to have to wait hours to charge. And where will one repose in the heat of summer or cold of winter while waiting for an 80% charge? Running the heater or A/C will dramatically lengthen charging times. Oh yes: cold greatly reduces range and lengthens charging time too, and it gets kind of chilly in much of the US during about half of the year.
Also keep in mind that while electric motors have great acceleration and torque characteristics, they come at a very high cost in power. Getting anything close to the optimistic projected range figures EV cheerleaders spout is also going to require very modest and gradual acceleration. Let’s not even talk about the realities of going four wheeling in the back of beyond with an EV truck. In 4WD, a driver is going to be able to watch an EV “charge remaining” meter dwindle at warp speed. The same will be true for people who use pickups for actual work, hauling things and traversing non-ideal terrain.
Electrek.co assures us the future is nothing but EVs because consumers are going to demand them. Riiight. Not out here in Normal America, speed.
Considering the reality of an electric F-150 hauling a trailer as I did, I’d need at least four charging stops to cover 500 miles. Figure, just to be ridiculously fair, only two hours for a full charge—because 80% wouldn’t be enough range—and a seven-hour one-way trip suddenly becomes 15 hours, for most people, a two-day affair. Sorry, but normal Americans don’t have the time or money to put up with that sort of nonsense, so they’re certainly not going to be clamoring for vehicles that reduce their productivity, efficiency and profitability by more than 100%.
Oh, and EVs cost considerably—as in many thousands—more than conventional vehicles. Yup. We’re all going to demand that future.
Ah! the joys of living in 2021 America!
FWIW, my F250 SuperDuty (6.2 liter gas) goes from ~16 mph to 9.7 mph when pulling my 7600 lb travel trailer. My previous Silverrado 1500 could not maintain speed going up a mountain.
And let’s not even get into the conversation on what a family is to do when the SHTF and it is everyone for themselves.
My wife and I enjoy going on long distance Trail Rides (on horses… we live in Texas). That involves a pulling a 3-4 horse trailer + a sleeping space accross the tall mountains out West. ~ 20,000 lbs minimum over 7,000 feet altitude.
We have a 1 ton Dodge dually with a Cummins Turbo Diesel engine. Anything weaker would simply not get it done.
I have nothing against battery powered cars per se but do the math. If someone wants us to just stop our hobby in our old age, it would be nice if they just said so.
Dear Rum:
And that’s a good part of the point. EVs just aren’t suitable for much of the country and for many applications, to say nothing of how upset people are going to be if and when the government starts trying to force them into EVs.
Here is a link to my blog post detailing my all or nothing go-no go list for even considering an EV. While not as specific as SMM’s post or the previous comments, I believe my points are more along the lines of what the average vehicle owner would have to consider.
https://75mpop.blogspot.com/2021/04/this-is-what-it-will-take.html?m=1
Dear Glypto Dropem:
Good points!
I agree that Gasoline and Diesel are not going to be fully replaced by EV’s, and in places like the Midwest they will likely never make any headway, but I can tell you that they are going to become much more common in urban areas.
EV’s are useful to the power grid of urban areas since they can draw power to charge outside of peak hours. Charging your car overnight helps balance the amount of power that the power companies has to produce. The generators used to create power have a limited number of start/stop cycles before they have to be overhauled (which costs millions of dollars) so power companies are happy to sell you extremely cheap power during the off hours.. because it means fewer start/stop cycles on their generators. Consistent draw from the energy grid is a very useful thing from an urban planning standpoint.
These same urban areas are typically full of traffic congestion and cars creeping along between 5-30 mph, greatly contributing to smog. EV’s can easily run AC and are at their most efficient cruising along at low speed. Add that the average urbanite, even in the sprawl of metro Atlanta is rarely if ever going to drive more than 120 miles in a day (my daily average was 70-80 miles per day when I lived there, and I drove further than most) and an EV with a range of 250-300 miles suddenly becomes a viable option with real benefits.
I agree that trying to force the entire nation to go electric is a fool’s errand, and an example of people in government and the bureaucracy passing laws on subjects they don’t fully understand. I was skeptical of EV’s as well after my experience with a Chevy Volt (34 mile range? You must be joking. Come on GM). However I think Tesla has actually made good progress with their cars. Tesla has a plant in China and the Chinese are going electric in a big way, so I don’t worry about Tesla’s long term solvency anymore. For your average commuter in the SE, electric vehicles aren’t a bad choice at all. When they come down from toy status in the next 10 years or so we’ll see them become much more ubiquitous. On the plus side, if GM/Toyota et al all start having electric vehicles in their lineups, we might see a return of the larger sedans the EPA regulations killed (I still miss my Mercury Grand Marquis)
In my large city, 1 mii. in an urban area of 1500 sq.mi. we rarely sit in traffic idling, except at our many traffic lights. our rush hours are typically 2-3 hours long. So EV’s don’t do much for us in terms of lost efficiency.
The joys of overnight charging are mitigated by our extended night time hours from November to March, which coupled with the much colder temperatures in the winter have furnace motors running much of the night. We seldom have any capacity that is not used, as most of our excess power is sent to the west coast or to the south via our linked in grid.
This is the case for most Canadian cities. The bigger ones like Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal get most of their power from hydro and nuclear. So little stop and satrt of generators.
And for half of the year we would be using all those accessories that drain power from the battery of an ev.
Also about half the vehicles in our area are pickups, suv’s or minivans. even those with one child families opt for these types of vehicles.
Dear wardalanm:
Canada is generally colder, longer, than much of the US, but EVs are poorly suited for any cold climate, which is also great swaths of America.
Dear Optimistically Pessimistic:
What you propose is possible, but unlikely, at least for now. D/S/Cs don’t want people driving anything. They want them to move to cities and to rely on public transportation.
We have to keep in mind EVs continue to be much, much more expensive than conventional and generally comparable vehicles that are generally much more flexible and useful. Also, even Elon Musk recently said we don’t have anywhere near the electric generating capacity to handle any increase in EVs, and what are D/S/Cs doing to address that problem: demanding the retirement of most power plants, resisting nuclear plants, and trying to replace them all with windmills and solar. Oh sure; we’ll just recharge all those EVs overnight.
Also keep in mind when an EV battery fails, they cost in the $7,000 and more range to replace. If you’re doing the kind of urban driving you mention, you’re charging them much more frequently, which quickly diminishes total charge capacity and battery life.
There is no free lunch where physics is concerned, and no matter what D/S/Cs think is reality, most Americans aren’t going to buy it, certainly not on their timetable.
Back when I used to drive semitruck, I had a Freightliner tractor with twin, 200+ gallon saddle tanks. I’d typically take on 350 gallons. Most truck stops had pairs of pumps with satellite pimps so you could fill both tanks simultaneously. The fuel hoses were much larger diameter than normal gas pump hoses, indicating the much higher fuel flow rate. In spite of the twin, high capacity pumps, I had time to pay a leisurely visit to the bathroom and get a cup of coffee. Once finished, I was good to go 1,600+ miles before I needed to refuel again.
Dear Elmer Fudd:
Imagine the acres and acres necessary for EV charging station truck stops, every hundred miles or so. A delivery trip that takes a day now would take nearly a week.
We just ordered a Tesla Model y. It arrives at the end of the month. I’m no eco freak, I just want to play with the technology. In the SF bay area, there are plenty of charging stations including super chargers. Most trips for us are in the 10 mile range. Driving to San Francisco, about 40 miles one way, is the limit of what we do. For cross country, we still have our minivan. I wish I still had my F150, but i just did not drive enough to keep it busy. After 16 years it only had 65K miles on it. I like electric propulsion, I just don’t like the power source. However, Tesla has done more in the self driving area than just about anyone. For example, they built their own chips.
It will be interesting to see how things go. The car is very fast and handle almost as well as my 535 sport, which I”m replacing with the Tesla. Mike, you are correct, when you floor it, the %charge does noticeably decrease. Gas is over 4.00 / gallon here – at Costco. Recharging the Tesla over night is about 11.00. It’s just an experiment.
Dear Phil:
I’ve never had an unreasoning hatred of the technology. I merely point out it’s not suitable for most Americans. That and it’s wrong for Government to use tax dollars to subsidize EV manufacturing and purchases.
One effect that would be positive is that if more urbanites drove EV’s and the power grid is hardened and more Nuc plants are built. That would be a win. The internal combustion engine would still reign supreme outside the city.
Dear Phil:
I certainly have no objection as long as no one is trying to force me to buy one, is using my tax dollars to subsidize other’s purchase of one, and as long as we have reliable, affordable power regardless.
We are just back from a college hunting trip to Boston. Very few Tesla’s there. It gets too cold in the winter for the batteries to operate well. Instead the batteries have to use some of their energy to heat themselves to get to operating temperature.
We also took public transportation, I.E., the T (their subway system). As you mentioned Mike, D/S/C’s don’t want us driving, it clogs the road and slows them down. I timed most of our trips. The fastest to MIT from Logon airport, took 45 minutes, the longest to Alewife (love that name), took 1.5 hours. Most of the time was waiting for trains/buses to come. Fine for a vacation, not acceptable for normal live. That’s our future however, if the D/S/C’s have their way.
Dear Phil:
Imagine the wait times if pretty much everyone depended on government transportation.
The hypocrisy of the climate activists is unbelievable. They scream bloody murder about logging which keeps our forests healthy. However, filling the pristine countryside with solar panels and wind mills to power all these EV’s isn’t a problem. I wonder if anyone has studied how many acres green energy generation is going to consume.
Dear David Adsit:
An area about twice the size of California to produce intermittent, unreliable power that would not come close to meeting current needs, to say nothing of a nation entirely dependent on electric vehicles.
Pingback: Electric Vehicles: They’re On Fire! | Stately McDaniel Manor