https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a4...nsit-ev-order/

Not a Lightning topic but Ford specific. I'll reserve comment until a few more chime in

 

Just about one of the best use cases for a BEV in function, but not financially for the USPS.

I do remember watching a few years back when the USPS brought forth their budget, or lack there of because they have been in financial turmoil for decades now. They broke down just how much more it would cost them to use BEV vs the Oshkosh ICE trucks and the EPA/Government wanted no part of their factual and logical presentation showing BEV's were going to put them further in the hole financially and did not make sense the least. Wonder if they got some taxpayer bailout... I mean Free Government Subsidy.

 

I can hear the calls now. "My truck won't start" *Um, it's electric just turn the key, select forward or backward and push the peddle* "oh" x 300/day.

 

The existing fleet of LLV's has been enough to keep a few GM parts suppliers alive and well.

The PO was so stupid to buy into these vans as by their design, they will restrict the operator in the types of mail delivery that can be performed. Unlike the Mercedes Metris van, it's at least a feeble attempt to get a sufficient vehicle on the street as a bandaide until Oshkosh gets the NGDV's out.

Congress pushed hard on the Postmaster General about the lack of BEV's that Oshkosh was building, he pushed back and told them to provide the additional funding or leave it be.

Since the article addresses a few issues, the NGDV ICE version is no less fuel efficient than the current LLV's but far more capable. The NGDV is being built as a 3/4 ton chassis capable of hauling the extensive volumes of cargo that we deliver today.

When I was driving an LLV, I was typically getting about 150 miles out of a 12.5 gallon tank. So, the 126 mile charge cycle listed in the article makes the Transit no better in terms energy required. Now I'm driving a two ton which is an E-450 camper chassis with a box and shelves and AC and is using a Ford 6.8L V-10 at a whopping 3 gallons of gas per day to drive my route of about 13 miles.

As concerned as I am about the long term viability of a BEV in the USPS fleet performing our severe duty cycles, I'm excited to see how it does and how long it lasts before it needs major work. To me, it makes perfect sense to use an EV that doesn't drive more than 25 miles per day which would include transiting to the delivery area and then delivering a curbline route, rolling box to box.

Routes like mine where I move from apartment complex to complex and shut down won't make much difference.

 

I would imagine all the electric vehicles will be assigned to warmer/ mild climate regions until they get battery tech that's not so cold temp sensitive.

 

I think this makes a lot of sense as well. As mentioned above, low speed stop-and-go is where EVs shine, so the efficiency gain will be substantial.

They don't waste a pile of gas running rich during a warmup cycle. It takes significantly less energy to run an electric cabin heater than idling a gas engine because <60% of the energy is wasted.

That's not quite right. Batteries don't have less energy in cold weather; it's all about consumption. It takes more energy to run an EV in colder weather, so that battery capacity doesn't get you as far. But even so, they do better than some think. The cabin heater in the Lightning is about 8 kW from what I've found online, and they only draw that much when warming up a cold cabin or during extremely cold weather. Even the standard-range Lightning could burn the cabin heater at full power for 10 hours and have dozens of miles remaining. For most winter conditions, you'd need between 1-3 kW to keep the cabin warm during a workday. Even on colder days, I don't think you'd lose more than 30% of your battery to cold weather.

I think it's a shame that Ford didn't choose to use heat pumps like some of their competitors. After going through Minnesota winters with both types of systems, I'd never consider another EV with a resistive heater. The efficiency gain is huge. [/color]

 

The manual for the lithium battery in my motorcycle says if the bike won't start, turn the key on so the headlight comes on and leave it like that for a minute or so then try to start it. Something about warming the battery so it can get the electrons moving.

Is it the same with the lithium batteries in these new Ford Transits they're about to get? I have no idea but I do know you don't have as much range in the cold that you will in the warm climate. Especially if they have resistive heaters.

 

I've never seen anything like that. Cold batteries have higher internal resistance, so they're power-limited at low temperatures. Tesla doesn't permit full discharge as it gets below freezing, but it's only a few percent, and that capacity becomes available as the battery warms. Kia/Hyundai have a "Winter Mode" which will preserve maximum performance by using the battery heater to keep the battery above 14º F. It's not mandatory to use below that, but you won't get maximum power from the pack.

You can't effectively warm the battery by discharging it, but it only really matters when you need to charge it quickly. Recent Tesla software calibrations have more aggressively triggered battery heating for some reason. Mine will burn energy to warm the battery for a few minutes when AC charging at 35º. But charging and preconditioning the cabin are the only times I've seen it activate; it only comes on while driving if you're navigating to a fast charger. Some threads on another forum suggest the Lightning doesn't heat the battery unless plugged in or navigating to a charger.

 

To be fair the battery is 12 years old. Wish I still had the owners manual for it to show where they say to turn the bike on and wait a few mins if it's slow or no cranking. It's happened twice so far and damned if it didn't work. Was very cold out both times and both times it wouldn't spin the engine fast enough until I let it sit with key on, then it spun over like new.

EDIT: Found the info.



In the faq for the manufacturer website. https://shoraipower.com/faq

 

An off the shelf E-Transit has an MSRP of nearly $50K. The Postal versions will need shelving which will add to the cost. We know that the government will get a better price than $50K but by how much?

It's projected that the NGDV Ice version from Oshkosh will run about $35K per unit completely outfitted and ready for work.

These fools better sell a lot of stamps.

 

Is that right? The first order of 50,000 NGDVs is a $2.98 billion contract, which works out to $59,600/ea.

I don't know the extent that they're using off-the-shelf parts, but my experience with Oshkosh vehicles in the military wasn't great. I have a lot more faith in a standard-line Transit holding up than a purpose-built Frankenstein from a defense contractor. I'm not casting aspersions on Oshkosh or their ability, but there are a lot of core competencies that you develop along 100 years of automotive mass production. On top of that, you can buy a lot of electricity for the maintenance and fuel savings they would realize over the expected lifespan of the NGDV.

 

.
Wonder what the ROI would be if only driving 25 miles/day. Seems to me that would take a long time.

 

35K is the figure that's been thrown around for a while and since the original contract language came out, the USPS has been persuaded to increase it's number of Oshkosh EV's from 10% to a much higher number. The entire original NGDV contract was quoted at $6 billion before changes were made to add more EV's and charging infrastructure.

The Frankenstein that you speak of is actually an Oshkosh body with a Ford driveline and Ford's Co-pilot 360 suite. Everything but the box an the frame rails are off the shelf. The cold climate units will be AWD and the others will be Front wheel drive, according to reps from Oshkosh whop were in attendance at the NALC National Convention in Chicago last summer.

The Ram Promaster and the Transit vans have been attributed to so many injuries and ailments in the letter carrier craft, ankles, knees, hips and feet. A typical letter carrier may ingress / egress 50-100 times a day. These vans are high off the ground and have an awkward step and this all forces the carrier to enter / exit in the street instead of on one's front lawn from the right side. The carrier must then walk around the van and work everything from the passenger side of the vehicle which is time consuming and arduous at best. On both vehicles, access from the front cabin to the rear cargo area is tight limiting one's ability to exit through the sliding side door.

This last paragraph has nothing to do with BEV's but is trying to illustrate how an off the shelf vehicle is unsuitable for purpose type work such as delivering mail.

 

To add to the above, the Oshkosh gas powered units are supposed to be convertible to an electric powertrain in house (VMF) as infrastructure/bean counters permit.

 

Just read some interesting news on the NGDV trucks. Last I had heard only 10% of the new fleet would be electric to start with, now I'm reading that 75% of the approximately 66,000 NGDV's will be electric to begin with and ALL fleet purchases will be "zero emission" by 2026.

Guess I'm going back to school soon.