Lightning vs Silverado EV after the latest ford price increases/feature deletes?

[sotek2345]

guess it’s a “hybrid” in some sort if sense, but of course it’s not a “hybrid” of the sort we’ve become accustomed to thinking of when we think of”hybrid” vehicles. I think more the jargon is a “range-extender,” like on the BMWi3, which includes a gasoline engine only used to charge the batteries, not connected to the wheels.

im no expert, but I *think* that’s the distinction between a true “hybrid” and a “range-extender”: the former can use and switch to a gas engine to move the wheels, whereas the later uses a gas engine only to charge the batteries.

unlike the BMW i3, I think a full-sized pickup with the right “range extender” set-up could be a category-winning option. Say (hypothetically), a pickup with 500mi battery range around town could ALSO have a 300 mi towing range if and only when utilizing a tool-box sized “range-extending” option located in the bed of the truck.

With the RAM, everything is fake news and conjecture, except that Dodge has said the Ram BEV would offer “onboard power” and a “paradigm breaker” technology. Conjecture from there wonders if it’s a “range extender”

The issue with "range extenders" is what happens at zero or low battery. People will want to be able to add gas / diesel and keep going. Given you mainly want this when towing, you need a "range extender" that has enough output to tow 10klbs at highway speeds up hills. That is effectively an F150 motor.

The BMW i3 had this issue - the extender didn't have enough output to move the car uphill on the highway.

 

[beatle]

My guess is that you'd still need to charge the battery periodically. The range extender allows you to go further before that happens, but it's not a full replacement for the energy the battery can provide. You'd want to keep track of both the fuel gauge on the generator/extender and the battery level. Ultimately though your remaining battery is what propels you down the road.

 

[metroshot]

You won't get lower trim Silverado EV until at least 2025, plus, Chevy would increase price for sure.

Whoa, you mean I can't get the Silverado WT EV for $42K like they advertised in 2024 ?

I have a first minute reservation for the GM EV hoping to get their base model WT.

Is that like the Lightning Pro where they didn't make but a few for 2022 and pushing back till late 2023 for a MY'23 Pro?

 

[greenne]

My guess is that you'd still need to charge the battery periodically. The range extender allows you to go further before that happens, but it's not a full replacement for the energy the battery can provide. You'd want to keep track of both the fuel gauge on the generator/extender and the battery level. Ultimately though your remaining battery is what propels you down the road.

That's my guess too. If the extender were enough to charge the batteries(if that were the goal) then I'd think it would be much more efficient to drive the vehicle using a plug in hybrid configuration. If I'm not mistaken, that was the downfall of the Volt. Great for commute, but after that first 50mi was horribly inefficient as the "engine" charged the batteries just to drive the car. The weight of the engine needed to produce that much energy outweighed the benefit.

If the goal is just to extend the range by adding a little charge while driving, the "generator" can be rather small so the weight penalty is small. You'd really only need to extend the range to say 500mi. beyond that *most* people will stop driving for the night(rest) and can deep charge.

 

[greenne]

Whoa, you mean I can't get the Silverado WT EV for $42K like they advertised in 2024 ?

I have a first minute reservation for the GM EV hoping to get their base model WT.

Is that like the Lightning Pro where they didn't make but a few for 2022 and pushing back till late 2023 for a MY'23 Pro?

Chevy is actually saying the WT will come out first in 1st half of 2023, followed by the first edition RST in Fall 2023. (Regular Silverado EVs summer 2024).

Now whether that is just fleet and/or if its just lip service who knows. I don't know GM's ability to scale up.

You would think they would watch the demand for Lightning and plan appropriately...

 

[Roy2001]

Whoa, you mean I can't get the Silverado WT EV for $42K like they advertised in 2024 ?

I have a first minute reservation for the GM EV hoping to get their base model WT.

Is that like the Lightning Pro where they didn't make but a few for 2022 and pushing back till late 2023 for a MY'23 Pro?

I remember GM stated clearly they will build quad motor version first. Ford at least built some Pro/XLT version. Tesla would do the same, quad/tripple motor version first.

That makes sense from business point, just like Tesla made Model S first, then Model X. Ford must lost quite a bit on Pro.

 

[metroshot]

Chevy is actually saying the WT will come out first in 1st half of 2023, followed by the first edition RST in Fall 2023. (Regular Silverado EVs summer 2024).

Now whether that is just fleet and/or if its just lip service who knows. I don't know GM's ability to scale up.

You would think they would watch the demand for Lightning and plan appropriately...

This would be great news if they build the base WT during the first half of 2023 but then @Roy2001 is saying GM will build the more expensive platforms first ?

According to the website, it says:
"WT estimated MSRP starts at $39,900 + DFC* with optional features and content, including up to 20,000 lbs. towing capability*. Future variations will offer a range of MSRPs, from around $50,000 to $60,000, $70,000, $80,000 and more, depending on selected battery range and available features such as Multi-Flex Midgate® with pass-through, panoramic fixed-glass roof, 4-Wheel Steer and Wide Open Watts Mode - providing a wide variety of capability and pricing."

Guess I'll let you all know when I get invited for the GM EV WT in 2023 - which trim will be first to build...

 

[greenne]

I remember GM stated clearly they will build quad motor version first. Ford at least built some Pro/XLT version. Tesla would do the same, quad/tripple motor version first.

That makes sense from business point, just like Tesla made Model S first, then Model X. Ford must lost quite a bit on Pro.

The Silverado does not have a quad motor powertrain. To my knowedge, all versions will have a dual motor awd powertrain

 

[Roy2001]

The Silverado does not have a quad motor powertrain. To my knowedge, all versions will have a dual motor awd powertrain

I guess I should say 4 wheel steering model with long range.

 

[greenne]

This would be great news if they build the base WT during the first half of 2023 but then @Roy2001 is saying GM will build the more expensive platforms first ?

According to the website, it says:
"WT estimated MSRP starts at $39,900 + DFC* with optional features and content, including up to 20,000 lbs. towing capability*. Future variations will offer a range of MSRPs, from around $50,000 to $60,000, $70,000, $80,000 and more, depending on selected battery range and available features such as Multi-Flex Midgate® with pass-through, panoramic fixed-glass roof, 4-Wheel Steer and Wide Open Watts Mode - providing a wide variety of capability and pricing."

Guess I'll let you all know when I get invited for the GM EV WT in 2023 - which trim will be first to build...

Thats just what has been quoted in the media...who knows for sure what will happen. But I'm pretty sure GM said the WT(probably fleet) in Spring 2023...

 

[greenne]

I guess I should say 4 wheel steering model with long range.

That makes sense. I mean they have already said the first non-commercial version would be a 1st edition RST for $105k. At the time I couldn't stomach $105k, but at the rate things are going maybe $105k doesn't look so bad.

 

[cvalue13]

That's my guess too. If the extender were enough to charge the batteries(if that were the goal) then I'd think it would be much more efficient to drive the vehicle using a plug in hybrid configuration. If I'm not mistaken, that was the downfall of the Volt. Great for commute, but after that first 50mi was horribly inefficient as the "engine" charged the batteries just to drive the car. The weight of the engine needed to produce that much energy outweighed the benefit.

If the goal is just to extend the range by adding a little charge while driving, the "generator" can be rather small so the weight penalty is small. You'd really only need to extend the range to say 500mi. beyond that *most* people will stop driving for the night(rest) and can deep charge.

Agree, and I think this is all that would be required for Ram to deliver a “paradigm” shift in pickup truck EVs. I imagine something like either or both of the following:

(1) Road Trip Extension: before a significant road trip, I not only do charge to 100% I also put in [10] gallons of high-octane fuel, and before departing can select the “range extender” to prioritize either:

(A) “emergency” distance supply (ie saving most onboard generation for a tail-end addition of range if and only if required to avoid unforeseen circumstances), or​

(B) “range extension” supply (ie employing the onboard generation during the whole of the trip, adding an effective [20%] range increase)​

(2) Towing Extension: before a significant towing trip, I not only charge to 100%, I also put [10] gallons of fuel in the range-extender (as well as a few 10-gallon jerry cans in the truck bed), and before departing select a tow mode that utilizes the generation similar to (1)(B) above, but - if only from a marketing angle -drenched in some attractive talk about algorithms that employ the extra charge in towing-specific ways, which [10] gallons of fuel now means I can tow [50] miles further than [Ford’s] leading package

If Ford can sell people on “massaging” seats and “BlueCruise,” I can’t see how Ram couldn’t even better sell people covering to EV pickups on such sorts of “emergency” or “on call” range extension features

Brands have built entire lines on less (looking at you, Chevy Avalanche)

 

[cvalue13]

 

[greenne]

Agree, and I think this is all that would be required for Ram to deliver a “paradigm” shift in pickup truck EVs. I imagine something like either or both of the following:

(1) Road Trip Extension: before a significant road trip, I not only do charge to 100% I also put in [10] gallons of high-octane fuel, and before departing can select the “range extender” to prioritize either:

​

(A) “emergency” distance supply (ie saving most onboard generation for a tail-end addition of range if and only if required to avoid unforeseen circumstances), or​

​

(B) “range extension” supply (ie employing the onboard generation during the whole of the trip, adding an effective [20%] range increase)​

(2) Towing Extension: before a significant towing trip, I not only charge to 100%, I also put [10] gallons of fuel in the range-extender (as well as a few 10-gallon jerry cans in the truck bed), and before departing select a tow mode that utilizes the generation similar to (1)(B) above, but - if only from a marketing angle -drenched in some attractive talk about algorithms that employ the extra charge in towing-specific ways, which [10] gallons of fuel now means I can tow [50] miles further than [Ford’s] leading package

If Ford can sell people on “massaging” seats and “BlueCruise,” I can’t see how Ram couldn’t even better sell people covering to EV pickups on such sorts of “emergency” or “on call” range extension features

Brands have built entire lines on less (looking at you, Chevy Avalanche)

All kidding aside, that could be a BFD for folks towing trailers. Having stop every 2-3 hours vs stopping every hour could move the needle from not possible to maybe. (Especially in places like North Dakota)

There are use cases for a range extender, Although I'd LOVE to get everyone into a BEV with no gas at all I realize that getting 90% of the way there is better than where we are now.

 

[VTbuckeye]

That's my guess too. If the extender were enough to charge the batteries(if that were the goal) then I'd think it would be much more efficient to drive the vehicle using a plug in hybrid configuration. If I'm not mistaken, that was the downfall of the Volt. Great for commute, but after that first 50mi was horribly inefficient as the "engine" charged the batteries just to drive the car. The weight of the engine needed to produce that much energy outweighed the benefit.

If the goal is just to extend the range by adding a little charge while driving, the "generator" can be rather small so the weight penalty is small. You'd really only need to extend the range to say 500mi. beyond that *most* people will stop driving for the night(rest) and can deep charge.

The Volt was actually pretty good. Gen 1 was rated at 39 miles EV, then a little over 40mpg. 40mpg is not great compared to a Prius, but we didn't need to use the ice often. At highway speed it would actually link the engine to the wheels for a little bit more efficient travel. The big gripe about the car was how loud the engine was and it was not at all tied to vehicle speed. I believe the second generation was quieter, more efficient and had a slightly larger engine. Volt gen 1 also had poor headlights and massive A pillars. I liked the drivetrain overall and eventually replaced it with a Bolt. We developed gas anxiety (what do we need to do to not have the gas engine turn on). I liked having the ice for long drives, but with a 15 mile round trip commute even when below zero I had plenty of EV range. At 14F the engine would turn on for a minute or two, then every few minutes it would turn on again. Never actually warmed up, to oil looked like a chocolate milkshake (probably fuel dilution, but definitely condensation from cold start after cold start). If they made the drive train with 50 percent more power it would have been great in an equinox/terrain.
After a few years there was some research done comparing the gen q volt, gen 1 leaf, and Plug in Prius. The volt had the most EV miles by far. Less EV range than the leaf, but people could use all of the EV miles and keep on going. Gen 1 leaf owners usually had an ice only car for longer trips. PIP had 11? mile range.

A range extender for an EV truck, if small, would need to run selectively from a relatively high state of charge so that the battery level could be maintained for as long as possible. It would probably vibrate a bunch, be loud and not very efficient. A true phev version of the truck with a decent size engine (could be NA 4 cylinder) could probably work if there is a large enough battery buffer at the bottom. It would take away from the frunk utility... probably great for towing, but the everyday shorter range utility would be reduced.

Sponsored