Good morning, everyone.

This forum doesn't get a lot of activity, so I'm going to try and post a bit more. I've mentioned previously how fast the charge networks seem to be improving. I learned this morning that two new DC fast chargers are being built in areas that solve all of my towing range concerns. I usually tow my boat from Isanti, MN down to boat ramps on Lake Minnetonka and the St. Croix River, 52 and 66 miles away respectively. My truck has the extended range 130 kWh battery pack, and others have gotten as bad as 1 mi/kWh when towing big things. My boat is 5,100 lbs on the trailer without gear, and probably a smidge more aerodynamic than a full-profile camper, so I'm planning on a 1.0 mi/kWh as a worst-case. That would put my favorite ramp on the St. Croix just out of reach from a full charge unless I slowed down, and there haven't been any compatible chargers on a direct route from either locations.

Until now. One of my favorite gas station chains has been installing fast 180 kW chargers at some of their locations, and I just learned that two are being built along the only two routes home from these ramps. One is 15 miles south of me, and the other about 35, which is perfect for topping up on the way home if needed. There are others on the map, but they are slow 25-50 kW units at dealerships. One of those a brand-new station that's been my most common fuel stop with my Expedition for the last few years.

I was concerned about towing range when I bought my Lightning because of charger availability, but it looks like that won't be a problem by the time boating season rolls around. As you can imagine, I'm feeling more than a bit relieved about that. Minnesota isn't alone in this fast buildout, so I expect viability for those in other rural areas is going to get better in the near future.

 

Looks like the USPS needs to bolster their charging station theft/vandalism prevention.

Link: https://www.govexec.com/management/2...ng-evs/393117/

 

Sounds like it, but that's a pretty small amount in the grand scheme of things.

They must be using slower Level II chargers that would charge the vehicle overnight, and the cost is usually around $500 for a typical unit. The article isn't clear on specifics, so we don't know if all of the losses came from that KC distribution center, or if there were other locations affected. What really surprises me is how much attention is focused on the lack of compliance with anti-theft recommendations. It's almost like they were laying around uninstalled and someone just walked off with them?

My first thought when I saw the loss amount was how small it was. I exchanged messages with a former manager for Circle K's EV charging buildout, and he told me the average cost per location was $500K to install two DC fast chargers. About half of that was site work, with the other half being the equipment. DC fast chargers aren't cheap, but the Post Office shouldn't need anything like that.

 

Headline: Hyper-Fast EV Charging Is Coming To Supercharge The EV Transition

Link: https://insideevs.com/features/70343...harging-speed/

 

^^^The EV haters will pounce all over the closing lines of that article advising its WE (owners/drivers) who must change because recharging a battery as quickly as we fill gasoline/diesel fuel tanks ain't just around the corner or even anytime in the "near" future either. Matching fossil fuel replenishing now seems to be as big a hurdle as the currently available mileage ranges offered by most manufacturers.

Interesting stuff............

 

It's an interesting article, and I'm eager to see how fast battery tech progresses in the next few years.

I've been out visiting my parents in New Hampshire since the middle of December. Mom had surgery to remove a lung tumor on 12/18, and my dad is having a stent installed on Thursday, so I've been out here helping out. I've driven at least 3,000 miles since getting here, most of that between my parents' house in Concord and the greater Boston area. My mom just replaced her Sienna with a new Kia EV9 last Friday, and her biggest reason to go with an EV was the added convenience. We've never gone over 220 miles in a single day, so we never would have had to stop for gas or charging because she'll be able to leave the house with a full "tank" each morning.

She's spending $2,150 to have a charger installed as I'm writing this post. We've taken her car to public chargers three times over the last week because the 120v charger wasn't enough to keep up with how many miles we've been driving. Yesterday, we plugged into a charging station in Burlington, MA with the battery at 13% and walked in to grab lunch. The car was at 80% by the time our food was delivered twenty minutes later, and 96% when we left. I don't expect she'll be seeing that EA station again because of the 240v charger that's going on the wall later this morning.




My Lightning doesn't charge nearly as fast as her new EV9, but I expect the next-generation truck will do much better. Mine takes as long as 35 minutes to go from 10-80%, which is the longest I'd consider to be reasonable for road trips. Out of everyone I've dealt with online and at charge stops, I've never met an EV owner who complained about charging times. Charger reliability is a concern, particularly with EA, but that'll get resolved soon with the opening of Tesla's network and all of the competition coming online.

I flew out here this time because of the cost advantage. I prefer to drive, but there's no way I could come close to the cost of a $100 plane ticket for this 1,500-mile trip. I'll be hitting the road again in April with my new camper, and I'm looking forward to seeing how my truck does on Tesla's bespoke charging network.

 

When traveling from GA to out west, it is common for us to do a ~1,000 mile stretch the first leg and 600+ miles the second and third leg. We are very efficient when we stop for fuel and are normally under 10 minutes from stop to start again. Sometimes we get the dogs running a bit and take a few extra minutes.

This is why we are looking forward to a mid-sized AWD SUV that gets 500 mile range and can go from 10% to 80% or more in ~10 minutes.

Although, the battery charge rate doesn't change the availability of a charger when we are in the middle of nowhere and even gas stations are far and few between.

Until then, a hybrid will likely be our next vehicle and I will stay up to date with technology advancements and charger availability (location as well as reliability).

This is my perspective and not meant to be argumentative or distracting from those that love EV's in the current state.

 

Not at all; I'm clear-eyed about EVs not meeting the needs of a sizeable chunk of the population. I think they're getting better, though, and the charging networks are improving at a faster pace than ever before. It's a heckuva lot cheaper and easier to set up a DC charger than a gas station, so there's no reason they can't be almost as common in a few years.

I'm happy to exchange a bit of inconvenience when travelling for a much more convenient daily drive, particularly with the cold weather we see in January and February. That calculus is different for everyone. I think hybrids are an obvious solution, though. I don't like Ford's complex answer with the Powerboost's complicated electrical sandwich between the engine and transmission. They took an already complicated system and made it worse. Most lighter-duty systems use different methods of constantly-engaged gearsets that are known for lasting forever.

My ex-wife is in the process of getting a hybrid Grand Highlander that's rated at 37/34 MPG. She's not even looking at the Explorer or any of its conventionally-powered brethren because of the huge efficiency difference. She'll burn 50% less gas in her new Toyota, and that adds up no matter how cheap gas prices are.

 

I believe the F150 Power Boost (hybrid) only shines when driving in town when it can go into electric mode. Unfortunately there appears to be enough parasitic load that the hybrid system creates which reduces the highway mpg. So if taking long trips a hybrid maynot be a good fit.

 

It's kneecapped by only being offered with 3.73 gears. I was really disappointed in the efficiency I got out of the rental truck I had in November. I couldn't get 24 in town, either.

It's got a boatload of power, but they completely missed the ball on efficiency.

 

I would have thought the 2.7 EB would have been a better choice, but I don't know the load the charging system puts on the engine so perhaps that's why the 3.5EB got the green light

Power or Efficiency... Pick one as you can't have both.

 

I think you can if done right. The Prius got along just fine with a 76-HP gas engine for years; hybrid systems don't require a larger engine. The latest Prius has 196 HP and zips to 60 MPH in 7 seconds with a 56 MPG rating.

I'm not an engineer, but I can't fathom a reason why they didn't offer more efficient gears than 3.73. I drove my dad's 2.7L truck to the dump and was impressed as it chugged up an 8% grade in 7th gear at 1,500 RPMs. This thing gets almost 25 MPG on these rural roads around Concord, which is better than I ever managed from the Powerboost rental.

Stick a hybrid powertrain behind this engine, give it 3.31 or 3.55 gears, and it would be the most efficient pickup on the road.