OT: Electric vehicles

[BROTHERSKINNY]

'What a Joke': Man Tries to Tow with His Electric Truck - Shows How It Was a 'Total Disaster'​

While EV trucks may lessen your “environmental impact,” some most definitely fail to perform what should be one of a truck’s most basic functions — towing over long distances. Take the 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning, for example.

Automobile savant and commentator Tyler “Hoovie” Hoover decided to test the Lightning’s towing capacity in a video uploaded to his YouTube channel on Friday.

The experiment didn’t go so well, to say the least.
Hoover’s goal was to drive the truck 32 miles with only an empty trailer in tow, load up his recently purchased 1930 Ford Model A pickup truck and then tow it back the same 32 miles.


The automotive aficionado was originally going to make the trip a second time, so he could load up something heavier to test the Ford’s maximum tow capacity. After the first trip ended in “total disaster,” however, Hoover determined it wouldn’t even be worth trying.

Upon simply loading up the empty aluminum trailer and driving roughly one-quarter mile out of his neighborhood, the EV had already used up 3 miles of range. By the time Hoover traversed the first 32 miles, the Ford had lost a whopping 68 miles of range. As you might imagine, once he loaded up the Model A truck, the situation took a sharp turn for the worse.
Despite having the EV charged for 200 miles of range at the start of the 64-mile trip, by the time he returned with his Model A truck in tow, only 50 miles of range remained.

Are you kidding me? That’s almost 90 miles of range in 30 miles. Are you serious,” Hoover said in the video, clearly bewildered.

“That’s nuts. What a joke,” Hoover added as he laughed.

At the end of the video, Hoover gave a brief overview of the experience.

In his view, if you’re wanting to buy a truck for appearance’s sake, the Ford F-150 Lightning is a fine vehicle.
https://www.westernjournal.com/joke...tm_content=2022-09-26&utm_campaign=manualpost

 

[OntheBanks]

'What a Joke': Man Tries to Tow with His Electric Truck - Shows How It Was a 'Total Disaster'​

While EV trucks may lessen your “environmental impact,” some most definitely fail to perform what should be one of a truck’s most basic functions — towing over long distances. Take the 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning, for example.

Automobile savant and commentator Tyler “Hoovie” Hoover decided to test the Lightning’s towing capacity in a video uploaded to his YouTube channel on Friday.

The experiment didn’t go so well, to say the least.
Hoover’s goal was to drive the truck 32 miles with only an empty trailer in tow, load up his recently purchased 1930 Ford Model A pickup truck and then tow it back the same 32 miles.


The automotive aficionado was originally going to make the trip a second time, so he could load up something heavier to test the Ford’s maximum tow capacity. After the first trip ended in “total disaster,” however, Hoover determined it wouldn’t even be worth trying.

Upon simply loading up the empty aluminum trailer and driving roughly one-quarter mile out of his neighborhood, the EV had already used up 3 miles of range. By the time Hoover traversed the first 32 miles, the Ford had lost a whopping 68 miles of range. As you might imagine, once he loaded up the Model A truck, the situation took a sharp turn for the worse.
Despite having the EV charged for 200 miles of range at the start of the 64-mile trip, by the time he returned with his Model A truck in tow, only 50 miles of range remained.

Are you kidding me? That’s almost 90 miles of range in 30 miles. Are you serious,” Hoover said in the video, clearly bewildered.

“That’s nuts. What a joke,” Hoover added as he laughed.

At the end of the video, Hoover gave a brief overview of the experience.

In his view, if you’re wanting to buy a truck for appearance’s sake, the Ford F-150 Lightning is a fine vehicle.
https://www.westernjournal.com/joke...tm_content=2022-09-26&utm_campaign=manualpost

I wonder what would happen on the same trip with an ICE Ford F-150. Start out with a gasoline range of 200 miles in the tank.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

There's no way it all happens at once. Eventually all vehicles may have sufficient AI and onboard compute to make all decisions rationally. But it's worth remembering that airspace is currently controlled by a combination of air to air and air to ground communications in addition to what's onboard the individual aircraft.

Aggregating nodal characteristics is a centralized function in computing.

It won't happen all at once. It will be handled by local regulators. Waymo and Cruise are already operating in geofenced parts of Phoenix and San Francisco. And yes, I know their approach to autonomy isn't scalable, but still, it's out there. I assume Tesla's more generalized approach would be pushed out state by state, but not sure exactly how that works.

Don't think airspace and driving is a fair comparison. Navigating in and out of a busy airport requires that type of communication. Vision only for airspace sounds like a bad idea too. Different animals.

You should check out Tesla's AI Day 2 this Friday. It will be livestreamed on YouTube. Their first AI Day, if you missed, is currently up on YouTube

 

[RU4Real]

Don't think airspace and driving is a fair comparison. Navigating in and out of a busy airport requires that type of communication. Vision only for airspace sounds like a bad idea too. Different animals.

I don't understand the point you're trying to make, here.

Air traffic and ground traffic are, from an endpoint management perspective, very much analogous.

 

[mildone]

I don't understand the point you're trying to make, here.

Air traffic and ground traffic are, from an endpoint management perspective, very much analogous.

I'd argue that they are very analogous in some ways, but that automating flight and landing is actually somewhat easier due to there being fewer unexpected conditions to cope with. Not saying they don't occur, but I would think that they are relatively finite in variation, more easily detected, and their impacts are well understood and accommodated versus what can happen on the ground.

There is a very large set of potential unexpected scenarios with wildly varying variables that can occur on the ground, especially in cities or suburban areas. And the ease of detecting them can vary widely given various conditions.

So, if anything, it's probably even more critical for communication between cars and other cars, and between cars and various infrastructure, as it is for aircraft.

One good example is that a car in front of a line of cars that has detected a child running out onto the road might suddenly brake very hard. It would be much better to communicate that detection to all the cars behind BEFORE the brake lights are activated with slight delays along the chain of cars.

Whereas it's not often that an aircraft has to, you know, jam on it's brakes mid-air, and when it does, aircraft behind will have plenty of time to alter course.

 

[RU4Real]

Whereas it's not often that an aircraft has to, you know, jam on it's brakes mid-air, and when it does, aircraft behind will have plenty of time to alter course.

Until you're on final and some twin Cessna pops up from a GA airport and is on a collision course.

 

[mildone]

Until you're on final and some twin Cessna pops up from a GA airport and is on a collision course.

Right. But to my point, while that can and does happen and is pretty nasty when it does, it happens with far less frequency that all the similar sort of stuff happens with cars.

I mean, if not, I'm never flying again. 🙂

 

[RUevolution36]

2023 Mercedes-Benz EQE Sedan Review: A smaller, less expensive EQS - Autoblog

Here's everything you need to know about the 2023 Mercedes-Benz EQE electric luxury sedan, from powertrains to tech to comfort and size.

www.autoblog.com

 

[RUevolution36]

That's a start.

States get final OK to build highway EV charging network

All 50 states have received final approval to begin construction on a first nationwide network of electric vehicle charging stations that places one roughly every 50 miles along interstate highways.

apnews.com

 

[OntheBanks]

That's a start.

States get final OK to build highway EV charging network

All 50 states have received final approval to begin construction on a first nationwide network of electric vehicle charging stations that places one roughly every 50 miles along interstate highways.

apnews.com

"begin construction on a first nationwide network of EV charging stations that places one roughly every 50 miles (80 kilometers) along interstate highways".
How about 1 for every 2 gas pumps at every gas station in the US.
How about 1 for every 2 gas pumps at each rest stop along the interstate highways.
You don't need a full charge every time you stop along a long trip.

 

[jtung230]

Human drivers navigate with a brain and vision. Our roadways are designed with that in mind. There's no reason why multiple cameras and neural nets can't do the same one day.

If Tesla was so focused on making it safer, why do they keep marketing 0-60 speed?

 

[RUevolution36]

"begin construction on a first nationwide network of EV charging stations that places one roughly every 50 miles (80 kilometers) along interstate highways".
How about 1 for every 2 gas pumps at every gas station in the US.
How about 1 for every 2 gas pumps at each rest stop along the interstate highways.
You don't need a full charge every time you stop along a long trip.

It's a start. Not the end.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

I don't understand the point you're trying to make, here.

Air traffic and ground traffic are, from an endpoint management perspective, very much analogous.

Autonomous flight and autonomous driving are not the same. Navigating air traffic requires knowledge of 3 dimensions and awareness potential dangers thousands of feet away in any direction. Not true of driving. Pilots don't navigate with vision only. Drivers do.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

Square this circle.... 😂 For some reason EA went from numerical to arbitrary buzz words for their charging speed.

In an effort to make electric vehicle (EV) charging less confusing, leading EV charging company Electrify America has introduced a new charger labeling system that makes it even more confusing. It requires drivers to intuit whether “hyper” or “ultra” chargers are faster. This is, apparently, better than the previous system, which was to determine whether 350 or 150 is a bigger number.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3p...lectric-vehicle-charging-a-lot-more-confusing

 

[RU4Real]

Autonomous flight and autonomous driving are not the same. Navigating air traffic requires knowledge of 3 dimensions and awareness potential dangers thousands of feet away in any direction. Not true of driving. Pilots don't navigate with vision only. Drivers do.

Pilots don't navigate solely by sight because systems were developed to mitigate the risk associated with it.

Planes used to run into each other (and mountains, etc.) on a regular basis.

The fundamental logic behind managing the endpoints is the same, whether they're cars or planes. You can't see that, fine. But it's true.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

If Tesla was so focused on making it safer, why do they keep marketing 0-60 speed?

This is out of left field. What does this have to do with a vision only approach to autonomy? When FSD beta or Autopilot is activated, I can assure you the vehicle is not doing the drag strip thing.

But, since you asked, if Tesla began their business selling geeky, slow, glorified golf carts, they'd be bankrupt, and the transition to electrified transport would be dead. You probably wouldn't be enjoying your ID4 without Tesla's success. I'm fine if you want to debate Tesla's safety. I'm sure you have all the data, rather than just holding a bitter grudge against the company.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnko...-score-ever-in-european-test/?sh=3bf26d9c4ff3

 

[RUfinally2008]

You didn’t think this one through did you?

What am I missing? Electric cars in an evacuation zone will/is a total disaster. Only apologist for this corrupt administration would argue otherwise. Salt water and batteries is also a nice combo, lmfao at the stupidity.

 

[RUevolution36]

This is out of left field. What does this have to do with a vision only approach to autonomy? When FSD beta or Autopilot is activated, I can assure you the vehicle is not doing the drag strip thing.

But, since you asked, if Tesla began their business selling geeky, slow, glorified golf carts, they'd be bankrupt, and the transition to electrified transport would be dead. You probably wouldn't be enjoying your ID4 without Tesla's success. I'm fine if you want to debate Tesla's safety. I'm sure you have all the data, rather than just holding a bitter grudge against the company.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnko...-score-ever-in-european-test/?sh=3bf26d9c4ff3

The geeky, slow, glorified golf cart worked for Hybrids. WIthout the success of the Prius, hybrids would still be quite fringe.

 

[RUevolution36]

If Tesla was so focused on making it safer, why do they keep marketing 0-60 speed?

Tesla also doesn't mention what happens to battery range if you utilize all of that 0-60 power.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

Tesla also doesn't mention what happens to battery range if you utilize all of that 0-60 power.

Congrats! Your gotcha moment. I forgot that ICE vehicles show MPG on the sticker specifically for aggressive driving.

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

What am I missing? Electric cars in an evacuation zone will/is a total disaster. Only apologist for this corrupt administration would argue otherwise. Salt water and batteries is also a nice combo, lmfao at the stupidity.

Another brainiac getting their EV talking points from the fossil fuel industry.


Now put your tail between your legs and go away.

 

[RUevolution36]

Congrats! Your gotcha moment. I forgot that ICE vehicles show MPG on the sticker specifically for aggressive driving.

no, but people don't have ICE range anxiety.

 

[mildone]

Another brainiac getting their EV talking points from the fossil fuel industry.

View embedded media

Now put your tail between your legs and go away.

Like you don't take all your talking points from Tesla? You're too busy winning friends and influencing people to self-reflect, I guess.

Here, I'll help. You seem to have an issue with other people's intelligence, frequently citing it in your insults. This is a trademark of intellectually insecure people. You seem above average in intelligence, so no need to be so insecure. Talk it over with your therapist.

Or don't and continue insulting people's intelligence then self-declaring victories you never actually earn.

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

What am I missing? Electric cars in an evacuation zone will/is a total disaster. Only apologist for this corrupt administration would argue otherwise. Salt water and batteries is also a nice combo, lmfao at the stupidity.

The scare tactics are baffling to me. Like this is actually a serious argument against EVs. However, this is an easily tested proposition. A giant hurricane is about to slam into a state with a relatively high EV adoption rate. By your logic, we should all see many destroyed EVs because of salt water intrusion in the battery packs. Or not.

 

[mildone]

no, but people don't have ICE range anxiety.

Reading that there will be EV chargers about every 50 miles along the interstate, maybe as many as 4 per station, actually increased my resistance to an EV SUV. Especially when they mentioned about 1 hour to fully charge as if it was a good thing.

I mean, a lot of folks travel along the interstates and with just 4 chargers, and with some people charging as much as possible to make it as far as possible before having to stop again, I wouldn't want to be pulling off to charge my SUV just to find a line of a dozen cars split across the 4 chargers all waiting for an hour for the person in front to finish.

Sure, that won't always be the case. But there's no way of knowing that it won't be the case. That doesn't provoke anxiety in me. It just steers me in the direction of an ICE or hybrid SUV.

 

[mildone]

The scare tactics are baffling to me. Like this is actually a serious argument against EVs. However, this is an easily tested proposition. A giant hurricane is about to slam into a state with a relatively high EV adoption rate. By your logic, we should all see many destroyed EVs because of salt water intrusion in the battery packs. Or not.

I mean, it's not an EV thing, but a motor vehicle thing, right? Doesn't really matter what kind of car, if the car gets flooded out by the storm surge, it's going to probably wind up totaled by an insurance company (assuming one is involved).

If a car is flooded with salt water, then its going to have all kinds of future rust and electrical issues.

 

[RUevolution36]

Electricity Transmission is Key to Unlock the Full Potential of the Inflation Reduction Act​

https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Transmission_2022-09-22.pdf

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

Electricity Transmission is Key to Unlock the Full Potential of the Inflation Reduction Act​

https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Transmission_2022-09-22.pdf

This is a really important element to link where renewables are produced versus where electricity is consumed.

 

[mildone]

Electricity Transmission is Key to Unlock the Full Potential of the Inflation Reduction Act​

https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Transmission_2022-09-22.pdf

I mentioned how important it would be for grid (i.e. transmission) improvements in upcoming years and got jumped all over for being anti-EV or taking "a party line" or similar nonsense. 😃

Guess I must have said it wrong. 🤣

 

[fsg2]

I mentioned how important it would be for grid (i.e. transmission) improvements in upcoming years and got jumped all over for being anti-EV or taking "a party line" or similar nonsense. 😃

Guess I must have said it wrong. 🤣

Maybe Musk or Tesla was taking some heat that day and they were particularly sensitive and defensive?

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

Maybe Mildone read the recent WSJ editorial railing against this. Note that WSJ editorial group is substantially different from their news reporting. Their editorials are virtual coal rolls against renewables.

 

[mildone]

Maybe Musk or Tesla was taking some heat that day and they were particularly sensitive and defensive?

Could be. I found it weird because I'm pretty sure I wasn't posting anything even remotely controversial (that day).

 

[RUevolution36]

I mentioned how important it would be for grid (i.e. transmission) improvements in upcoming years and got jumped all over for being anti-EV or taking "a party line" or similar nonsense. 😃

Guess I must have said it wrong. 🤣

i know, right? i say the same thing and some folks say that we don't have to worry about it and it'll just happen...

 

[mildone]

Maybe Mildone read the recent WSJ editorial railing against this. Note that WSJ editorial group is substantially different from their news reporting. Their editorials are virtual coal rolls against renewables.

At one time, I used to consume huge amounts of news and opinions about a wide range of topics, including politics. That was over 10 years ago. Might even be over 15 years ago, now. Time flies and all.

Now I don't read the WSJ or any other newspapers. Don't watch any televised news or political opinion shows. I only very, very rarely read political editorials from any source at all.

All I'm ever interested in reading are independently verifiable facts presented dryly and as completely as possible. I can form my own opinions once I'm able to find and verify enough facts about a thing. Problem is, it has become extremely hard to find news presentations that are both complete and unbiased these days. And it's getting harder ever year.

Nobody wants to follow a chain of regurgitated news stories about a particular thing all the way to the initial presentation of "facts". And when people do, they often find that there's no references, no sources, presented. Just some random news report citing facts without substantiation from which dozens and dozens of subsequent articles are based. This is taking place even in huge news networks now. Sucks.

 

[mildone]

i know, right? i say the same thing and some folks say that we don't have to worry about it and it'll just happen...

I've mentioned this a couple/few times, but I have concerns that we're (the US) putting EV adoption ahead of required infrastructure improvements to support and ensure EV adoption goes smoothly.

I know a lot of work is being done w/respect to EV infrastructure. But I'm not convinced it's enough. Not if EV adoption continues to speed up. Kind of a chicken or the egg thing, I know.

But getting it wrong could lead to a lot of pain for folks not living in dwellings where they can charge at home. Especially if places (like CA) mandate an early end to sales of ICE or hybrid vehicles (not sure if hybrids are being mandated out; I hope not though).

 

[BROTHERSKINNY]

I wonder what would happen on the same trip with an ICE Ford F-150. Start out with a gasoline range of 200 miles in the tank.

It would drop maybe 10% in fuel economy so around 20 milles vs.

I've mentioned this a couple/few times, but I have concerns that we're (the US) putting EV adoption ahead of required infrastructure improvements to support and ensure EV adoption goes smoothly.

I know a lot of work is being done w/respect to EV infrastructure. But I'm not convinced it's enough. Not if EV adoption continues to speed up. Kind of a chicken or the egg thing, I know.

But getting it wrong could lead to a lot of pain for folks not living in dwellings where they can charge at home. Especially if places (like CA) mandate an early end to sales of ICE or hybrid vehicles (not sure if hybrids are being mandated out; I hope not though).

you just know the democrats are going to **** this up….royally!

 

[fsg2]

Unlike the republi-holes, who would be yelling "muhhhhhh freeeedumz" with their last breath before choking to death on poisonous air.

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

It would drop maybe 10% in fuel economy so around 20 milles vs.

you just know the democrats are going to **** this up….royally!

Stop trolling, Boris.

 

[sdwcpa]

The scare tactics are baffling to me. Like this is actually a serious argument against EVs. However, this is an easily tested proposition. A giant hurricane is about to slam into a state with a relatively high EV adoption rate. By your logic, we should all see many destroyed EVs because of salt water intrusion in the battery packs. Or not.

I have said this in a prior post but I live in S FL( fortunately n the east coast). I purchased a PHEV with 40 miles of range that covers 90/95% of my total driving BUT also has a gasoline range of 550 miles that would go a long way to cover an evacuation situation.

I could not imagine myself if I lived on the west coast sitting on I 4 or I 75 in gridlocked traffic watching my range go down right before my eyes.

 

[jtung230]

This is out of left field. What does this have to do with a vision only approach to autonomy? When FSD beta or Autopilot is activated, I can assure you the vehicle is not doing the drag strip thing.

But, since you asked, if Tesla began their business selling geeky, slow, glorified golf carts, they'd be bankrupt, and the transition to electrified transport would be dead. You probably wouldn't be enjoying your ID4 without Tesla's success. I'm fine if you want to debate Tesla's safety. I'm sure you have all the data, rather than just holding a bitter grudge against the company.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnko...-score-ever-in-european-test/?sh=3bf26d9c4ff3

Tesla is not selling FSD because they care about safety. They are selling it because it high profit margin. If they are truly concern about safety, Tesla wouldn’t need ludicrous mode. Maybe they should focus on braking distance instead.