This is called a "series hybrid" rather than the more common "parallel hybrid" (eg Toyota Prius) and has been around for a while, including the BMW i3 with range extender (and London buses, and various other vehicles!). It's more expensive largely because the battery pack needs to be sized much larger to be able to provide enough current for all propulsion / regen. On the other hand, the combustion engine can be undersized and run at its most efficient RPM continuously - the BMW range extender is a 600cc little scooter engine that can provide enough power for continuous highway driving.
The hybrid architecture doesn't really matter anymore. EV buyers already have their BEVs. They won't be switching to EREV. What EREV does is allow someone that hates EVs to feel like they're not another EV driver with low range problems when in fact they're very likely going to be filling-up their EREV tank once or twice in 12 months.
> What EREV does is allow someone that hates EVs to feel like they're not another EV driver with low range problems
It allows them not only to "feel" but also to actually avoid low range problems.
> they're very likely going to be filling-up their EREV tank once or twice in 12 months.
That depends on location and availability of charging stations in the area. In many places it will take many years to get to adequate charging infrastructure and hauling around a backup charger helps in the interim. Regardless, getting stuck on the road twice a year is still two too many.
Low range problems are a direct function of the driver's ability to plan. No different than forgetting to fill-up the fuel tank. I will bet money there will still be people making excuses about lack of charging after EREVs are on the road.
Back in the 1970s (IIRC) the Mother Earth News sold me plans for just this: a car propelled by an electric motor, connected to a generator connected to a small gasoline engine that ran (when needed) at optimum speed and torque.
Rather than normal automobile batteries, they recommended using deep-cycle marine batteries.
That's what I was thinking, sounds just like the Volt. The Volt was a very practical vehicle, drove great and cost so little to fuel up. Most weeks I owned the Volt I wouldn't put gas in it, in fact I would go so long without using the ICE sometimes that the car would fire up the engine for automated "engine maintenance".
In the winter it would only get about 60KM all-eletric range, but for daily city driving or a short commute, that was generally fine. In summer the range was closer to 120KM.
This new truck is supposed to get 233KM electric range, which will be more than enough for both city driving and the majority of commutes, round trip. With the DC fast charge, you can also add 80KM in 10mins which isn't too bad. I think this makes it a very practical vehicle for most folks. Even trades people using it as a work truck where they drive to a site and perhaps use the truck for power will be able to go without using the ICE probably 90% of the time.
I really liked the Volt. Probably would have bought one, but by the time we were in the market for a new car (rarely are, tend to drive them until they get to be really expensive to keep repairing), they'd terminated the product line.
> Car and Driver estimates that the vehicle will run at least $60,000. Ram’s gas-powered truck, meanwhile, starts at $42,000.
I don't know how much of this is attributable to truck culture, how much is newfangled tech, and how much is the changing landscape of capitalism, but this drives me nuts.
Until two years ago. The most expensive car my family had bought was US$20k, a then four year old CR-V. Last year, we bought a then two year old ID.4 at a little over $30k. That was a bit of a tough pill for me to swallow, but I wanted a vehicle with less maintenance than an ICE car and less fuel cost. Admittedly, than $30k will take a long time to recover (but electricity is certainly much cheaper than gas, especially today).
But a $60k vehicle? There is no way I'm going to rationalize that kind of purchase. I already said 'no' to that when Ford hiked the price of the Lightning and my only option was an upper-tier model around that price point.
This feels very similar to what Edison Motors is doing for the trucking industry. Electric powertrain with on-board generator.
https://edisonmotors.ca/
This is called a "series hybrid" rather than the more common "parallel hybrid" (eg Toyota Prius) and has been around for a while, including the BMW i3 with range extender (and London buses, and various other vehicles!). It's more expensive largely because the battery pack needs to be sized much larger to be able to provide enough current for all propulsion / regen. On the other hand, the combustion engine can be undersized and run at its most efficient RPM continuously - the BMW range extender is a 600cc little scooter engine that can provide enough power for continuous highway driving.
Seen only 45km-on-battery hybrids. But why does this vehicle need oversized battery and the only one that takes advantage of undersized engine?
The hybrid architecture doesn't really matter anymore. EV buyers already have their BEVs. They won't be switching to EREV. What EREV does is allow someone that hates EVs to feel like they're not another EV driver with low range problems when in fact they're very likely going to be filling-up their EREV tank once or twice in 12 months.
> What EREV does is allow someone that hates EVs to feel like they're not another EV driver with low range problems
It allows them not only to "feel" but also to actually avoid low range problems.
> they're very likely going to be filling-up their EREV tank once or twice in 12 months.
That depends on location and availability of charging stations in the area. In many places it will take many years to get to adequate charging infrastructure and hauling around a backup charger helps in the interim. Regardless, getting stuck on the road twice a year is still two too many.
Low range problems are a direct function of the driver's ability to plan. No different than forgetting to fill-up the fuel tank. I will bet money there will still be people making excuses about lack of charging after EREVs are on the road.
Is this new? A freind's BMW i3 had one of these many years ago. (Defnitely pre covid)
edit: the frist generation was 2013
I guess "previously rare" just doesn't sound as exciting as "new", never mind the facts. Journalism in $currentYear...
https://archive.ph/fpq1v
There's nothing new under the sun.
Back in the 1970s (IIRC) the Mother Earth News sold me plans for just this: a car propelled by an electric motor, connected to a generator connected to a small gasoline engine that ran (when needed) at optimum speed and torque.
Rather than normal automobile batteries, they recommended using deep-cycle marine batteries.
So.. the Chevrolet Volt approach?
That's what I was thinking, sounds just like the Volt. The Volt was a very practical vehicle, drove great and cost so little to fuel up. Most weeks I owned the Volt I wouldn't put gas in it, in fact I would go so long without using the ICE sometimes that the car would fire up the engine for automated "engine maintenance".
In the winter it would only get about 60KM all-eletric range, but for daily city driving or a short commute, that was generally fine. In summer the range was closer to 120KM.
This new truck is supposed to get 233KM electric range, which will be more than enough for both city driving and the majority of commutes, round trip. With the DC fast charge, you can also add 80KM in 10mins which isn't too bad. I think this makes it a very practical vehicle for most folks. Even trades people using it as a work truck where they drive to a site and perhaps use the truck for power will be able to go without using the ICE probably 90% of the time.
I really liked the Volt. Probably would have bought one, but by the time we were in the market for a new car (rarely are, tend to drive them until they get to be really expensive to keep repairing), they'd terminated the product line.
> Car and Driver estimates that the vehicle will run at least $60,000. Ram’s gas-powered truck, meanwhile, starts at $42,000.
I don't know how much of this is attributable to truck culture, how much is newfangled tech, and how much is the changing landscape of capitalism, but this drives me nuts.
Until two years ago. The most expensive car my family had bought was US$20k, a then four year old CR-V. Last year, we bought a then two year old ID.4 at a little over $30k. That was a bit of a tough pill for me to swallow, but I wanted a vehicle with less maintenance than an ICE car and less fuel cost. Admittedly, than $30k will take a long time to recover (but electricity is certainly much cheaper than gas, especially today).
But a $60k vehicle? There is no way I'm going to rationalize that kind of purchase. I already said 'no' to that when Ford hiked the price of the Lightning and my only option was an upper-tier model around that price point.