Ram 1500 REV - 350 mi (168 kWh) & 500 mi (229 kWh)

[SpaceYooper]

I like the "up to 500 miles". It's not as good as "500+" but it's nice to see them trying.

I wonder what the battery warranty is going to be.

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

lightnings do that at “HWY speeds,” and are shaped like an ice cream trucks

Drive it into a headwind of dry air, doing 75-80mph, and that ice cream truck mi/kWH can go south to 1.8 or more pretty quick

BEVs with traditional truck silhouettes + non-optimal hwy conditions are a poor mix

Enter CT

 

[S.H.Peterson]

I believe it when I see it
Stealership scalping WILL ensue.
Thusly, the dealerships will supress sales.
A HUGE bonus of dealing with Tesla is their straightforward and simple sales method

 

[scottf200]

lightnings do that at “HWY speeds,” and are shaped like an ice cream trucks

Drive it into a headwind of dry air, doing 75-80mph, and that ice cream truck mi/kWH can go south to 1.8 or more pretty quick

BEVs with traditional truck silhouettes + non-optimal hwy conditions are a poor mix

Enter CT

*1 RAM 1500 EV claim is 0.34 drag coefficient.
*2 Rivian says the R1T has a drag coefficient of just 0.30 Cd
*3 Ford F150 Lightning 0.?? coefficient
*4a Elon tweet exact text: "With extreme effort, Cybertruck might hit a 0.30 drag coefficient"
*4b Aleix Lázaro Prat, a CFD Engineer for Numeric Systems: CT drag coefficient of about 0.39 Cd

 

[cvalue13]

*1 RAM 1500 EV claim is 0.34 drag coefficient.
*2 Rivian says the R1T has a drag coefficient of just 0.30 Cd
*3 Ford F150 Lightning 0.?? coefficient
*4a Elon tweet exact text: "With extreme effort, Cybertruck might hit a 0.30 drag coefficient"
*4b Aleix Lázaro Prat, a CFD Engineer for Numeric Systems: CT drag coefficient of about 0.39 Cd

unsure of the take-away you’re intending?

but what I take away from your post is:

• Ram has long been a leader in aero for ICE trucks. Makes since they could do well in BEV

• the Prat model is inaccurate conjecture based on the alpha prototype design/features. I ignore it.

From there:

for scoping, the Model X has a 0.26Cd and Model Y is 0.24, and Model 3 is 0.23

seemingly small deltas in Cd are actually significant.

and because none of the Cd claims are standardized (different manus use different methodologies), I tend to care more about orders of magnitude than marginal deltas

The difference between 0.30 and 0.34 is greater than the difference between a Mod X and a Mod 3

Rivian is neither a full-sized truck (in my opinion), nor is it a traditional pickup design I was referencing (in my opinion). In any event, independent simulations have said 0.32 (harkens back to the point of no standardized methodologies)

I’ve seen the Lightning figure at 0.44 - which makes since for a truck that isn’t a ground-up BEV platform. (It’s an ICE design with BEV guts shoved in.)

The delta between 0.44 and 0.30 is nearly 5X the delta Model X and 0.30, and 4X the delta between Model X and Mod 3

and the effects of speed on those deltas are exponential - doing 70mph has something like 40% more drag than doing 60mph, and on down/up the slope.

We’ll see what Tesla comes out with, but my personal suspicion is that the CT will be wildly more aerodynamic than traditional pickup designs (Lightning), and won’t take much to be materially as good as a mid-sized BEV optimized for aero (Rivian)

Could be wrong!

 

[MonkeyDeLuffy]

I am betting on CT with the most efficiency, then R1T dual motors then RAM 1500. Also, no 0-60 acceleration was mentioned, probably because the production design(config) is not finalized yet, and all current prototypes show variants of results on that metric. This is concerning, they must have encountered some kind of difficulties to maintain range and performance as promised. Would you pay the same $ as TRX for a pickup that is slower and maybe shorter towing range?

 

[Ogre]

Don't forget about battery voltage arch and max kW charging limit.

How long does a ...
Model X with 333 mi range with a max of 250 kW @ 400v?
vs
RAM1500 with 500 mi range with a max 350 kW @ 800v

via https://teslatap.com/undocumented/

It’s a bit confusing to list it that way. While 350 kW is indeed faster than 250 kW, the voltage makes no difference.

Wattage is amperage * voltage.

If your vehicle charges at 250 kW, it charges at that speed regardless of voltage. It just means amperage is higher while it happens. Charging 250 kW @ 800v is the same speed as 250 kW @ 400v just means amperage is different while it’s charging.

250 kW = 400v * 625 amps
250 kW = 800v * 312.5 amps

Sorry… being a little pedantic. Everyone can continue.

 

[Ogre]

*1 RAM 1500 EV claim is 0.34 drag coefficient.
*2 Rivian says the R1T has a drag coefficient of just 0.30 Cd
*3 Ford F150 Lightning 0.?? coefficient
*4a Elon tweet exact text: "With extreme effort, Cybertruck might hit a 0.30 drag coefficient"
*4b Aleix Lázaro Prat, a CFD Engineer for Numeric Systems: CT drag coefficient of about 0.39 Cd

Umm. I guess it’s my day to be picky.

ChatGPT is not an authoritative source for much of anything. It can and will just make shit up if it doesn’t have accurate facts. It’s not even consistent between runs.

If I check ChatGPT, I get this.

,

Or this

 

[scottf200]

unsure of the take-away you’re intending? ...
seemingly small deltas in Cd are actually significant. ...
and because none of the Cd claims are standardized (different manus use different methodologies), I tend to care more about orders of magnitude than marginal deltas ...
Rivian is neither a full-sized truck (in my opinion), nor is it a traditional pickup design I was referencing (in my opinion). In any event, independent simulations have said 0.32 (harkens back to the point of no standardized methodologies) ... Could be wrong!

It has been a while since I looked at Cd info so I was curious how the trucks compared since someone brought it up. I recall looking at simulation software sometime ago which puts the vehicles on a somewhat level playing ground from comparisons.

I again found the Rivian one that I looked at (as I hit the like button on it to know I saw it). I think you'll be impressed if you watch it. Hint: It was not the smaller size of it but the design that made the real difference!! A design doesn't have to be a "spear" (cybertruck) or tear drop to be good (aptera).

I also found an F150 one that did some comparisons and adjustments related to the Cybertruck.

I didn't find anything related to RAM vehicles yet. ... but they have very strong claims with 0.34 so I think it will be reviewed and looked at closely. Especially if they get close to their mileage.

I think the F150 (first) and Rivian (second) reviews of the videos would be enlightening to many ... maybe not you but many. I watched them both today in that order and at x1.75 speed (gear icon) which was perfect IMO.

F150/Cybertruck
Title: Ford F150 Aerodynamics - How to add more than 10% range!



Title: Rivian R1T Aerodynamics - Is the claimed drag coefficient of 0.30 correct?

 

[scottf200]

ChatGPT is not an authoritative source for much of anything. It can and will just make shit up if it doesn’t have accurate facts. It’s not even consistent between runs.

Haha. No worries. Yes, I know it is not authoritative. I'm new to playing with it and just thought I'd try something off the top of my head as I never had it create a table. I'll will look at yours more later but going to watch some more 'The Night Agent' with my spouse for now.

 

[CyberGus]

Sorry… being a little pedantic.

Don't sell yourself short

 

[fritter63]

And it it's like my old Ram, it will ALSO chew through brake pads every 500 miles.....

 

[scottf200]

And it it's like my old Ram, it will ALSO chew through brake pads every 500 miles.....

Just [like] your old Ram ... wait ... except it has regenerative braking to limit physical brake pads even being used!

 

[scottf200]

It’s a bit confusing to list it that way. While 350 kW is indeed faster than 250 kW, the voltage makes no difference.

Wattage is amperage * voltage.

If your vehicle charges at 250 kW, it charges at that speed regardless of voltage. It just means amperage is higher while it happens. Charging 250 kW @ 800v is the same speed as 250 kW @ 400v just means amperage is different while it’s charging.

250 kW = 400v * 625 amps
250 kW = 800v * 312.5 amps

Sorry… being a little pedantic. Everyone can continue.

Haha, you sure read a lot into my post. Of course, I know that simple formula as does almost everyone on this site whos been into EVs for a few years. I should have said & instead of @ or whatever.

There are advantages to "800v" vs "400v" battery packs so just doing the math for the forumua doesn't tell the whole story. One of many articles about it 400v vs 800v what's the difference? Electric car battery voltage explained (link).

" EVs with 800V architecture -- Models include the Porsche Taycan, Hyundai Ioniq 5, Genesis G80 EV, Kia EV6 and Audi e-Tron GT. Other car manufacturers that have committed to an 800V architectures include Volvo, Polestar, Stellantis, General Motors, BYD and Lotus. The Lucid Air EV takes things a step further with 900V architecture, making it the fastest-charging EV ever. "​

There are some taking a different 800v angle:

4/6 UPDATE: would be interesting if they did this to on the 1500 REV too. Below from link

Sponsored