RAM cancels REV long range model

[earlyadopt]

It also negatively impacts competitors sales. A lot of people cancelled or held off Lightning purchases because of all these promises. I mean why would you get a Lightning when you can get a CT with 500 miles range for 39k. Then you wait for delay after delay. Years go by and then its oooops sorry, we couldn't do it. Here is an abomination that gets 300miles range for 80K. These companies know exactly what they are doing. Ram has been talking the talk ever since the Lightning was announced 4 years ago and yet here we are, another 500mile promise turning into lies (I mean sorry, we don't think its a great idea any more announcements).

Excellent point about impacting competitors. The cheap CT never did happen did it. Here in Canada, you get the CT for a nice $140,000+ CDN. Lightning goes for $65,000 XLT SR. For the extra cash, I could buy a gas truck for the longer trips or rent one.
Love my Lightning, does what I want, cheap to run,it's fast when needed and the drive is amazing!!

Sponsored

 

[lightspeed]

Clearly for the customer that does longer trips or hauling frequently. The gas used now does not store well for long periods of time. Not sure if the generator is not frequently use if issues around the gas intakes getting gummed up. I know my snowblower does not do well if I leve gas in it all summer. Any time you add more moving parts and complexity to a solution, problems happen.

I agree it's more complex which is why long term it doesn't make sense. But short term, it does address the biggest concerns of traditional truck buyers.

As far as the gas longevity goes, clearly the Ramcharger will have to run the generator periodically to cycle the gas. In cold weather, it should run the generator to warm up the batteries.

 

[Altivec]

The Ramcharger isn't a hybrid -- just to be clear -- it's a BEV with a generator.

Long term, gas-electric generators won't make sense and trucks will be all battery (when gen2 or gen3 batteries are mass produced), but short term it makes a lot of sense as an interim technology.

Put a 60kWh battery in a truck which saves 900lbs over a current 120kWh battery. Put a 200HP generator in the front which weighs 400lbs wet and you're still saving 500+lbs over a current gen battery.

Truck gets 150 miles on just battery, but now can go infinite range on gas AND the gas generator can be used to warm up cold batteries in extreme cold negating one of the worst aspects of BEVs (cold range loss).

I thought the same as you, did it, lived it, won't ever do it again. The inherent complexities of combining both systems outweighs the marginal gains you achieve. You lose the frunk, you are dealing with fuel and oil changes. Your battery is small so you go through its life cycles much quicker. As you stated, for heat, my BEV forces the engine to be on when it goes below freezing (so all of winter). So no more savings then. Because the engine is also small, it takes forever to heat up the rad to warm the battery. In the meantime you get a "low propulsion" warning and your cabin takes forever to warm up. If anyone of all these complex moving parts go down, you aren't going anywhere but getting towed to the few specific dealer mechanics that know that system (ie. be prepared to pay)

If you do a lot of long distance driving, you will be using the engine mostly. All you will be doing is destroying your battery quickly to save the odd tank of gas. That savings will be quickly eaten up by oil changes, complex repairs, and a new battery much sooner. I highly recommend sticking to ICE if this is your use case.

If you do not do a lot of long distance driving, EV's are the better choice. The odd charging stop when you do travel, is well worth not dealing with all the complexities above. Plus if you do not use the engine often, your gas gets stale and your seals dry up, introducing even more problems.

From my experience you pick one or the other. I get it though, I thought the same way so people are just going to have to learn it for themselves.

 

[lightspeed]

I thought the same as you, did it, lived it, won't ever do it again. The inherent complexities of combining both systems outweighs the marginal gains you achieve. You lose the frunk, you are dealing with fuel and oil changes. Your battery is small so you go through its life cycles much quicker. As you stated, for heat, my BEV forces the engine to be on when it goes below freezing (so all of winter). So no more savings then. Because the engine is also small, it takes forever to heat up the rad to warm the battery. In the meantime you get a "low propulsion" warning and your cabin takes forever to warm up. If anyone of all these complex moving parts go down, you aren't going anywhere but getting towed to the few specific dealer mechanics that know that system (ie. be prepared to pay)

If you do a lot of long distance driving, you will be using the engine mostly. All you will be doing is destroying your battery quickly to save the odd tank of gas. That savings will be quickly eaten up by oil changes, complex repairs, and a new battery much sooner. I highly recommend sticking to ICE if this is your use case.

If you do not do a lot of long distance driving, EV's are the better choice. The odd charging stop when you do travel, is well worth not dealing with all the complexities above. Plus if you do not use the engine often, your gas gets stale and your seals dry up, introducing even more problems.

From my experience you pick one or the other. I get it though, I thought the same way so people are just going to have to learn it for themselves.

What vehicle are you talking about? The Volt or the BMW i3? Both are pretty terrible examples of generator integration.

I agree that the better path for the long term is next-gen batteries plus better charging speeds and infrastructure.

By the time the Ramcharger comes out, other truck makers might be on gen2 batteries with 500+ mile ranges etc..

 

[Jseis]

Living in the rural US 2+ hours from freeways I find that regular 300 mile range is easily achievable on our slower two-lanes and I rarely see 50% of that 300 doing truck stuff. Haul stuff to the farm property, commute to work, trips to lumberyard, yanking the boat around to one of 3 dozen launches within 50 miles. While I can easily transit within one county, an adjacent county, particularly in winter/with a load.. that’d be a stretch 3 years ago but new charging stations/Tesla availability make it possible. And interstate range with DCFC availability is fabulous.

So the ER has the range “availability”, not 100% convenience though if trailer/weight packing. Probably not suited for the endlessly long-steep & rough logging roads that a faller or track/hoe-feller butcher operator spends endless hours on. Not going to replace a jobbers 1-ton either. But a real estate appraiser/agent, building inspector, cabinet installer, door hanger, possible.

The one group that’ll be tough to appease without 500+ mile range are diesel 1-tons; RV and stock trailer haulers, or hotshots making special deliveries. I’m beginning to think hybrid perfect until battery density increases by 20-30%.

One interesting trend is Lightning sightings are steadily increasing from non-existent 2 years ago to daily. Yesterday I saw 2 on US101 in 20 minutes. No rivians or CTs. The Lightnings are so stealth that I can miss one unless I look right at it.

 

[Altivec]

What vehicle are you talking about? The Volt or the BMW i3? Both are pretty terrible examples of generator integration.

I agree that the better path for the long term is next-gen batteries plus better charging speeds and infrastructure.

By the time the Ramcharger comes out, other truck makers might be on gen2 batteries with 500+ mile ranges etc..

I have a Cadillac ELR, which essentially is the 2nd gen Volt architecture. I am not really sure why you say it's a terrible example of generator integration. Everything I mentioned would apply to even the hypothetical best integration (and remember we are talking Dodge here).

One other important thing that I didn't mention which is even more important to trucks is, when your battery runs out and you are running on engine alone, you lose quite a bit of power output. If you are relying on a hybrid to TOW long distances, you should really check and see what it can tow when on engine alone. It won't be the fancy 14k towing they are going to try to market base on both systems running in small print. If you want that, you are going to be stopping even more to charge your small battery and then stopping at gas stations to also fill up.

 

[lightspeed]

Living in the rural US 2+ hours from freeways I find that regular 300 mile range is easily achievable on our slower two-lanes and I rarely see 50% of that 300 doing truck stuff. Haul stuff to the farm property, commute to work, trips to lumberyard, yanking the boat around to one of 3 dozen launches within 50 miles. While I can easily transit within one county, an adjacent county, particularly in winter/with a load.. that’d be a stretch 3 years ago but new charging stations/Tesla availability make it possible. And interstate range with DCFC availability is fabulous.

So the ER has the range “availability”, not 100% convenience though if trailer/weight packing. Probably not suited for the endlessly long-steep & rough logging roads that a faller or track/hoe-feller butcher operator spends endless hours on. Not going to replace a jobbers 1-ton either. But a real estate appraiser/agent, building inspector, cabinet installer, door hanger, possible.

The one group that’ll be tough to appease without 500+ mile range are diesel 1-tons; RV and stock trailer haulers, or hotshots making special deliveries. I’m beginning to think hybrid perfect until battery density increases by 20-30%.

One interesting trend is Lightning sightings are steadily increasing from non-existent 2 years ago to daily. Yesterday I saw 2 on US101 in 20 minutes. No rivians or CTs. The Lightnings are so stealth that I can miss one unless I look right at it.

People will buy whatever works for them.

The reason why I harp on 500+ mile for me is:

1 - To get a large part of the audience for 1/2 ton pickups, it should match at least match the utility of an ICE truck with a 24 gallon tank. It doesn't matter what people 'need.' It's what people want and perceive to have value.

2 - The real range of a 320 mile Lightning, is closer to 200 miles on road trips in cold weather at 75mph because you only charge to 80% and you lose so much range in the cold and with speed. So 500+ mile EPA is needed to get reasonable range in the real world.

I would be happy with 300 mile range under the worst conditions of 80mph highway driving in cold temps but you need 500 mile EPA to get there.

 

[PJnc284]

2 - The real range of a 320 mile Lightning, is closer to 200 miles on road trips in cold weather at 75mph because you only charge to 80% and you lose so much range in the cold and with speed. So 500+ mile EPA is needed to get reasonable range in the real world.

I would be happy with 300 mile range under the worst conditions of 80mph highway driving in cold temps but you need 500 mile EPA to get there.

200 miles in the cold might be a bit optimistic. Heck, I'm lucky to get 1.8@70-75mph here in Eastern NC even when it's warm. I think charging speed and efficiency will be important going forward v the GM route of throwing in the biggest battery you can find. It's no secret that the lightning rates pretty much at the bottom in terms of efficiency and charging for road trips. I would take a 15min stop to get back from 10% to 80% compared to 40-45min now. As it stands, a 15min charge only gives you about 30% or ~70 miles for me at interstate speeds on a nice day. Luckily I don't road trip much and my longest drives are usually about 120 miles which the Lightning is perfect for.

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

Put a 60kWh battery in a truck which saves 900lbs over a current 120kWh battery. Put a 200HP generator in the front which weighs 400lbs wet and you're still saving 500+lbs over a current gen battery.

- Don't forget the fuel system/tank weight plus any other equipment needed between the Generator and the BEV system.

Truck gets 150 miles on just battery, but now can go infinite range on gas AND the gas generator can be used to warm up cold batteries in extreme cold negating one of the worst aspects of BEVs (cold range loss).

- The range is not infinite on gas. It has the same limitation as battery. Once you use up your fuel source you need to stop to recharge/fuel. The difference is just the amount of range you need before stopping. My family can't go more than 180 miles without needing to pee. Range isn't an issue for us, or most people. Our trucks also precondition themselves in the cold via AC Power, or via Battery should you choose to do so. Now, if the arguement is that it takes longer to DCFC than to fuel, my response would be: "Currently".

*Also, once you use up your initial charged battery and need to refuel on a road trip, your range becomes only what the fuel tank holds unless you fill up and DCFC! It no longer gets 500+ miles between fillups.

I'm all for the Ramcharger, I think it's a great way to get more people, that are scared of EV, to join in on this new tech. The faster everyone else adopts BEV or Large Battery Plug-in Hybrids (like the Ramcharger) the faster the tech and infrastructure gets getter/grows.

Sponsored