Waiting for my electric pickup

[MillCreek]

http://www.havelaarcanada.com/bison/

http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/06/01/havelaar-canada-unveils-bison-electric-pickup-truck.html

I have been reading about various hybrid or electric pickups being designed, and this one looks interesting.

[Ben]

I was actually going to post about this as a discussion topic, based on something I read last week. It mentioned that Ford is NOT exploring electric pickups to any great degree at thuis time. One of the reasons being that if you want to use the truck as a truck (e.g., haul a half ton of gravel in the back), electric isn't there yet for the energy needed to handle truck chores for any decent length of run time between charges.

It sounds like any electric trucks coming out now will be geared more to daily drivers and the trip to Home Despot for a couple of bags of mulch or a few pieces of lumber. Nothing wrong with that considering how the majority of half ton trucks are used these days. A Tesla truck will likely cost what a Platinum F150 does, and both drivers would probably have clean and shiny beds.

[AJ Dual]

Is this all-electric or hybrid?

Because the whole "Hybrids save zero gas, because math and physics don't lie"-thing is still out there. And still 100% true.

There ARE hybrids that do serve a useful purpose though. It can be a much cheaper and easier way to get super-car sportscar like performance, like the new Acura NSX, because the electric motor's ability to produce raw torque is great for getting that kick-in-the-pants 0-60 performance, or that high end BMW i8... but they don't actually "save gas" for hours run or miles driven etc.

In the same vein, I could see an all electric truck being extremely useful. I agree with Ford's assessment that electric won't do a great job, or at least "yet" in towing for mile after mile, pulling the weight and wind resistance. And all you're doing is taking fossil fuel chemical energy, converted to mechanical energy to run a generator to create electricity and using it less efficiently through conversion losses.

However, for "low gear" applications where torque to the ground, and not horsepower rules supreme, a 4x4, or AWD-ish concept where each wheel has it's own electric motor could be insanely useful. Like getting a heavy towed load moving initially, or uphill, or if stuck in mud, or traction control where each wheel moves or not at it's optimum speed to get unstuck or over whatever obstacle it is you're trying to cross. And I can think of more crazy-useful things like independently pivoting all four wheels in opposition, and turing one side of the truck's wheels in reverse, the other side forward, allowing for a zero-radius turn or pivot right in place like how some forklifts can.

I could see that being incredibly useful to farms, ranches, industrial, or construction sites. Or even for delivery of small to medium size loads in congested urban environments. And I could then see using a gas engine as an onboard generator to recharge the batteries, not to save energy or gas, but to simply keep the benefits of electric motors and torque when far off the grid.

But to claim it "saves gas", to go from cylinder, to transmission, to generator, to battery, to motor, to wheel or even worse, have it go from cylinder to transmission to wheel sometimes, and sometimes to battery and motor, with all those extra subsequent parasitic losses... you're pissing down my leg and trying to tell me it's raining.

[zxcvbob]

But to claim it "saves gas", to go from cylinder, to transmission, to generator, to battery, to motor, to wheel or even worse, have it go from cylinder to transmission to wheel sometimes, and sometimes to battery and motor, with all those extra subsequent parasitic losses... you're pissing down my leg and trying to tell me it's raining.

That certainly explains diesel-electric locomotives. 

[Ben]

Is this all-electric or hybrid?

I believe the pickup at the URL and Tesla are all electric.

My understanding is that Ford is working on a hybrid, which from the sound of it, would actually be a neat development for people like building contractors. They are designing it to be used as an onsite generator when it's parked at the jobsite. It would also then allow gas to kick in when the truck carries a payload.

[cordex]

That certainly explains diesel-electric locomotives. 

I was under the impression that locomotives were diesel-electric because of torque profile, not for efficiency.

[charby]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Electric_Truck

[bedlamite]

However, for "low gear" applications where torque to the ground, and not horsepower rules supreme, a 4x4, or AWD-ish concept where each wheel has it's own electric motor could be insanely useful. Like getting a heavy towed load moving initially, or uphill, or if stuck in mud, or traction control where each wheel moves or not at it's optimum speed to get unstuck or over whatever obstacle it is you're trying to cross. And I can think of more crazy-useful things like independently pivoting all four wheels in opposition, and turing one side of the truck's wheels in reverse, the other side forward, allowing for a zero-radius turn or pivot right in place like how some forklifts can.

I could see that being incredibly useful to farms, ranches, industrial, or construction sites. Or even for delivery of small to medium size loads in congested urban environments. And I could then see using a gas engine as an onboard generator to recharge the batteries, not to save energy or gas, but to simply keep the benefits of electric motors and torque when far off the grid.

Giant mining dump trucks have been electric for a while

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474667016312939
http://jalopnik.com/396450/ge-gets-into-hybrid-game-with-giant-mining-truck

[zxcvbob]

I've thought for a long time that a front wheel drive vehicle with a small engine (just a little more than what's necessary for 70 MPH cruising on level highway) with D.C. electric motors in rear hubs to provide extra power for acceleration, climbing hills, etc, and for regenerative braking made sense. 

But it's probably too expensive to make vs just using a bigger engine.

[AJ Dual]

I was under the impression that locomotives were diesel-electric because of torque profile, not for efficiency.

Yep. Getting a fully loaded train that could be some significant fraction of a mile long... if that didn't call for torque, nothing does.

Torque and horsepower... in a rough "let's murder this analogy" sort of way, it's kind of like amps and volts. You only look at one, and you're not getting the whole story.

[Firethorn]

Because the whole "Hybrids save zero gas, because math and physics don't lie"-thing is still out there. And still 100% true.

It's not 100% true though?  I'm not saying that hybrid operation WILL save gas, merely that it CAN.  The latter models of hybrids offer far superior performance.

What you said is probably true for the first generation vehicles.  The ones using NiMH batteries, limited regenerative braking, etc...

physics doesn't lie - true.  But it's easy to explain how hybrids can save gasoline.  First step - get off the highway.  Hybrids make more sense in city traffic.

It's all about regenerative braking.  Modern hybrids are much better at it than old ones.  Physics wise, you collect what you can when you slow the vehicle to a stop rather than wasting all of it as heat in the brake pads.  Then you return that energy to motive force when you start up again.  Even if it's only 70% or so, that's still a lot of gasoline over time.  That's why a hybrid will post 'city' miles almost as good or better than highway miles, while some pure gas vehicles are almost half the mileage 'city' over highway.  Other things include keeping the engine off at lights, reducing standby gas use, reduction in engine size, and gearing modifications to keep the gasoline engine closer to 'ideal' energy extraction states(IE maximum power for minimum gas usage), etc...

In the same vein, I could see an all electric truck being extremely useful. I agree with Ford's assessment that electric won't do a great job, or at least "yet" in towing for mile after mile, pulling the weight and wind resistance. And all you're doing is taking fossil fuel chemical energy, converted to mechanical energy to run a generator to create electricity and using it less efficiently through conversion losses.

They already exist for areas where gasoline emissions aren't acceptable, such as inside warehouses and factories.  

But to claim it "saves gas", to go from cylinder, to transmission, to generator, to battery, to motor, to wheel or even worse, have it go from cylinder to transmission to wheel sometimes, and sometimes to battery and motor, with all those extra subsequent parasitic losses... you're pissing down my leg and trying to tell me it's raining.

You added a step - there's typically no transmission between the engine and the generator.  You're describing a series "hybrid" there.  Most actually go engine->transmission->axle->wheel and motor->axle->wheel.  Basically, both the electric motor and engine are capable of exerting torque on the axle.  While it means more losses(and that the electric motor can't charge the batteries if the car isn't moving) if you're trying to charge the batteries from the engine directly, it's better for regenerative braking, which is actually the primary means that hybrids use to charge the batteries.  It also removes the need to have a separate generator and motor, and prevents a conversion step.  AC Motors are perfectly capable of being AC generators as well.  So at any given time you have the generator/motor either acting as a motor and helping push the car, or acting as a generator and slowing the car.  If the battery needs extra charging while, say, going down the highway, it will act as a generator with a light loading, and simply boost the gas use of the motor by a smidgen.  Ideally when the engine is in it's ideal efficiency band.

I was under the impression that locomotives were diesel-electric because of torque profile, not for efficiency.

I think that's kind of the point.  Diesel-electric locomotives use the electricity bit as the transmission, because over their speed operating range and torque requirements a transmission would be more expensive, heavier, bigger, less durable, and less efficient than simply doing engine->generator->controller->motors->wheels.  It also gives them "electric braking" given that they have resister "nets" on the top of the locomotive to dump the electricity/heat from braking, because that way they aren't using up brake pads left and right.  There has been some research into adding batteries to store the electricity rather than merely dumping it.

I've thought for a long time that a front wheel drive vehicle with a small engine (just a little more than what's necessary for 70 MPH cruising on level highway) with D.C. electric motors in rear hubs to provide extra power for acceleration, climbing hills, etc, and for regenerative braking made sense.  

But it's probably too expensive to make vs just using a bigger engine.

Actually, except for operating on different wheels, that's how modern hybrids operate.  The fuel savings eventually make up the price difference, at least in high gas cost areas.

[Brad Johnson]

Electric pickup.





Brad

[Ben]

Electric pickup.





Brad

And an "invisible" button on the dash, just like in James Bond! Cool!