3 ms·

> The "advantage" of being able to drive 12+ hours without taking a couple hours to charge is absolutely ridiculous. It's not something people do or should do.

> The "advantage" of being able to drive 12+ hours without taking a couple hours to charge is absolutely ridiculous. It's not something people do or should do. I pretty regularly drive between Washington, D.C. and northern New Hampshire. That's about a 9hr drive under good traffic and weather conditions, 575mi. My truck gets about 13.5mpg and has a range of around 300mi, so I have to stop for fuel once. It's nice to get out of the car every 4hr or so anyway. If I was driving, say, a Rivian that gets ~400mi/charge I would also only have to stop once, but the stop would take about an hour and a quarter [1]. I could probably live with that, and I'd appreciate not burning as much dino juice. However, I recently did that trip with the truck totally freighted, towing a two axle trailer. I got 9.5mpg, which is about 65% what I get empty, putting my range at ~200mi/tank. I had to fill up twice. A Rivian under similar conditions will be getting about 260mi/charge. That means I'd have to charge twice, adding 2.5hr to what's already a 9+hr trip. Another thing my truck can do is go off road. It has a mild suspension lift, and locking differentials front, center, and rear. It runs slightly taller than stock tires to give it more ground clearance. I can roll over 2-3ft high rocks without having to think too hard about it. Under these conditions, I expect to get even worse than 65% of my empty highway mileage. 50% is common, and it can even be as bad as 35% in really technical terrain. Ignoring the fact that the Rivian would likely break if I tried to take it places my truck can go off road that translates to something like 150-200mi/charge. And if you're actually taking it off road you better plan for plenty of reserve, because there aren't any chargers there. > Who brings 160 lbs of gasoline with them anywhere? Someone who wants to get there, most likely. If you calculate you need to make it a certain distance, and you know your expected fuel burn rate, then you can count up the number of jerry cans you need. In this case they needed 5 of them. So it's a question of capability, right? My truck is in some ways more capable than the EV alternative. One capability I have is to be able to throw some cans in the back and extend my range. Another capability I have is being able to travel long distances under adverse conditions. Crucially, though, the capability my truck has that the competition lacks is I can fix it and maintain it without having to hire a specialist. It has simple, impeccably engineered field serviceable systems. And it cost 1/6 what a Rivian would. If someone makes an EV with these capabilities, I'll buy it, even if it does cost as much as a damn house. Until then, I'll stick with my old truck. [1] https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a38944499/2022-rivian-r1t-charging-test/ https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a38944499/2022-rivian-r1t-...

mlyle 3y ago
10 to 90 is indeed slow (not as slow anymore as that article). 10 to 80 is about 40 minutes. So not quite as bad as you're saying.
- jcgrillo 3y ago
  10 to 80 leaves me 70% effective capacity, so that's 0.7 * ~400 = ~280mi/charge. This would mean on my 575mi drive I'd spend 3 * 40min = 2hr charging. So it'll take me 11hr to do a 9hr drive. Let's say I was towing. That would give me ~180mi/charge. On the 575mi trip I'll have to charge 4 times, so 2hr40min. So that's actually worse than I calculated before in both cases. EDIT: it seems to me this technology isn't ready for production yet. Or, at least, it's best suited for subcompact vehicles that don't get loaded heavily. EDIT2: I get it, though. If I lived in a city or a suburb and used my car exclusively as a grocery getter + commuting rig, it might make sense to run an EV--if there was a good one available at a reasonable price. But that's the other thing. They're all expensive, unmaintainable, and packed full of useless infotainment garbage and a whole bunch of plastic--just like everything else built this century. So really what's the point of using electrons from the grid instead of gasoline from the pump if I have to get a new car every 5-10yr? Instead, I'll maintain my (currently) 25-30y.o. vehicles s.t. they'll last a further 20 years thereby having prevented something like 10 cars from ever having to be built in the first place. And I own them outright, so no car payment.
  - mlyle 3y ago
    > Let's say I was towing. That would give me ~180mi/charge. On the 575mi trip I'll have to charge 4 times, so 2hr40min. You wouldn't start full? Using your numbers, 250*.9 + 180 + 180 makes the trip in two charges. Stopping a couple of times for meals makes it take no net increase in time. edit: It definitely doesn't work for everyone and every use case, but it's much better than you calculate. The EV road trips I've taken have been slightly inconvenient but the day to day convenience of at home charging makes up for it. Also I don't understand why you're continuing to edit your message long after I replied.
  - jcgrillo 3y ago

mlyle 3y ago

10 to 90 is indeed slow (not as slow anymore as that article). 10 to 80 is about 40 minutes. So not quite as bad as you're saying.

jcgrillo 3y ago
10 to 80 leaves me 70% effective capacity, so that's 0.7 * ~400 = ~280mi/charge. This would mean on my 575mi drive I'd spend 3 * 40min = 2hr charging. So it'll take me 11hr to do a 9hr drive. Let's say I was towing. That would give me ~180mi/charge. On the 575mi trip I'll have to charge 4 times, so 2hr40min. So that's actually worse than I calculated before in both cases. EDIT: it seems to me this technology isn't ready for production yet. Or, at least, it's best suited for subcompact vehicles that don't get loaded heavily. EDIT2: I get it, though. If I lived in a city or a suburb and used my car exclusively as a grocery getter + commuting rig, it might make sense to run an EV--if there was a good one available at a reasonable price. But that's the other thing. They're all expensive, unmaintainable, and packed full of useless infotainment garbage and a whole bunch of plastic--just like everything else built this century. So really what's the point of using electrons from the grid instead of gasoline from the pump if I have to get a new car every 5-10yr? Instead, I'll maintain my (currently) 25-30y.o. vehicles s.t. they'll last a further 20 years thereby having prevented something like 10 cars from ever having to be built in the first place. And I own them outright, so no car payment.
- mlyle 3y ago
  > Let's say I was towing. That would give me ~180mi/charge. On the 575mi trip I'll have to charge 4 times, so 2hr40min. You wouldn't start full? Using your numbers, 250*.9 + 180 + 180 makes the trip in two charges. Stopping a couple of times for meals makes it take no net increase in time. edit: It definitely doesn't work for everyone and every use case, but it's much better than you calculate. The EV road trips I've taken have been slightly inconvenient but the day to day convenience of at home charging makes up for it. Also I don't understand why you're continuing to edit your message long after I replied.
- jcgrillo 3y ago