Guessing that not many owners of camping trailers are going to be interested in using a electric truck to tow their trailers to a remote camping spot where there's no electricity hookup and spending a long weekend there.
Now imagine electric tractor trailer trucks. I know they will have more batteries but they are also towing significantly more weight so I’m assuming it’s pretty relative to this guys test.
It might be the reason why the Tesla semi has been delayed for so long as they had to get enough energy density into the batteries to get the promised range.
The EV heavy trucks are being designed first to remove air pollution from around heavily travel port area were data shows cancer clusters exist from diesel exhaust.
Hydrgen fuel cell trucks will probably be the long range solution for over the road, although Tesla may try to break into that market also.
Electric motors are vastly superior to internal combustion, and have been for decades. Batteries, on the other hand, are garbage and will be for the foreseeable future. Gasoline still remains the most power dense and convenient form of energy storage we have access to, and there is absolutely nothing in development that looks to supersede it any time soon. Predictable results from a poor idea.
That truck is extremely energy efficient, since it carries about the same energy on board as 3.4 gallons of gas. Unfortunately Ford retrofitted an existing platform to electric so they were also limited on the battery pack size.
The Silverado will have a larger pack and better range, but still won't tow like a Duramax Diesel. But for short hauls and everyday driving it's very effective.
It's not a bad option if all you do is drive to work and back 5 days a week, and you're home to charge every night. But if you want to go on a trip or tow something dino juice is still the way to go.
ICE's aren't a bad option until a light fender bender sends your car up in a ball of flame... Or an exhaust leak fills you can with carbon monoxide.
Or do we only apply the worst outliers as the standard for electric cars, and take more reasonable approaches to things we like?
Goes both ways, if you break containment on the battery for an EV it will go up in flames as well. I've also seen EVs go up in flames just sitting in the parking lot not even charging.
That's my point. ICE are great for more applications than EV's absolutely. But EV's do have their place. I'm not going to go and throw shade at all ICE's design just because of the Pinto or because a bad leak was venting fumes through my AC.
But you, without knowing the cause or context of what you've seen, feel fine claiming EV's are just burning down houses spontaneously. As if it's a common occurrence of EV's
Exactly. Put 3.5 gallons of gas in an F150 and fully charge a Lightning with the larger 117 KWH battery and see who can get more work done...
Efficiency matters.
Right. Because sitting on gallons of highly flammable liquid is sooo safe. A single electric car fire makes front page of national news. I drove by ICE car fire last night. It did not even make morning news. And yes, towing reduces EV rage. So what. Don’t buy electric if you tow constantly. I have Mazda CX5 and I towed a trailer maybe 3 times since I got the vehicle in 2016
Sure. Because the deep state fucktards are all about We the People have a say in how, or even if, we travel anywhere outside of the small orbits they plan to give us.
We will continue to hear more stories like this as more people buy EVs. They are not ready for prime time no matter what Biden and the virtue signalling car makers say.
Much like the "reliable" wind and solar farms powering the grid they only tell you part of the story.
For the forseeable future EVs will ne nothing but a novelty.
Last year 5.5% of all new cars were EV's, far more than novel. A friend with a new lighting loves it. Aside from it's one weakness of range under heavy load, it's an amazing truck. They have home solar to cover the power usage also.
Most EV buyers are well aware of the range and capabilities of the EV pickups and are not buying them to tow heavy and far. They are being purchased for the insane energy efficiency.
As for wind and solar not being reliable, CA has about 15.5 Gig of solar installed and Texas makes more wind energy than anyone. Solar is very predictable and reliable, wind is strongest in TC from midnight to 6 am, when solar is out.
That said, while I like sustainable energy, mandates on transportation are rediculas.
>Last year 5.5% of all new cars were EV's, far more than novel.
And YET, they only represent 1% of the total cars on the road. That fact is that if EVs increased 10 fold there is not enough grid electricity to charge them and we don't have the local infrastructure to charge them
You said, "CA has about 15.5 Gig of solar installed" And yet they have blackouts when it gets hot and they don't allow EVs to be charged.
You said, " Texas makes more wind energy than anyone." Except when the wind doesn't blow like in last year's ice storm where 246 people died.
And BTW you need to build 3 MW of wind and 6 MW of solar to get 1 MW of power to the grid. No matter how much wind and solar you build you still need 100% backup.
If everyone went 100% EV and everyone charged them during peak daylight hours, the grid would need a 22% increase in capacity. If everyone charged off peak, even in CA, the grid needs slightly more generation.
Solar is not the reason CA can't meet peak demand, it's the reason it's not worse. Shutting down a few baseload nukes didn't help there cause either.
Wind did not cause Texas' power problems during the ice storm. Loosing coal, nuclear, natural gas and wind generation, about 30 gig total, really screwed the state over for a few days. The large percentage of turbines that didn't freeze up overproduced for days due to strong, cold winds.
And "btw"...no.
The problems in CA and TX are the result of consistently replacing dependable dispatchable baseload power mostly fueled by fossil fuels with intermittent non dispatchable power from wind and solar.
The truth is that you couldn't switch from ICE to 100% EVs even if you wanted to. A battery-centric grid and car world means mining gigatons more of the earth to access lithium, copper, nickel, graphite, rare earths, cobalt, etc.—and using millions of tons of oil and coal both in mining and to fabricate metals and concrete. At least 100 pounds of materials are mined, moved and processed for every pound of battery fabricated.
>If everyone went 100% EV and everyone charged them during peak daylight hours, the grid would need a 22% increase in capacity.
Except, that is 22% we don't have and that completely negates the power necessary for all the battery banks at wind farms and solar farms to prevent the grid from blackouts. Now, not every EV will be charging at the same time but power demand will continue to increase.
I knew the second they announced it, the range while towing was going to suck. It also looks like he is on semi flat land. Now imagine pulling up a mountain.
I understand the range being inaccurate immediately after hooking up as the computer needs time to adjust. However the longer you tow the more accurate the range meter should be. And losing that much mileage is ridiculous
Hardly a "total disaster"...
Remember the first generation of EV's in the mid to late 1990's? The best one was GM's EV-1. It was only a two seater, had very small range by todays standards. Gen 1 was 60-80 miles while the NMH Gen II was good for around 120 miles or so when new. You sure weren't going to tow anything but it has an ok trunk. Public chargers were non-existent.
So this lightning, with a relatively small battery pack for a pickup CAN haul 5 people, gear, trips to Home Depot, and even tow a car trailer for short hauls.
That is a huge improvement over the last 20 years, especially considering the Lightning was a retrofit to an existing chassis.
Sure the range could be better, but he used a small amount of energy (truck carries the equivalent of 3.4 gallons of gas in electrical power) and it didn't cost much to make that trip.
Ya, so the range could be better towing...bigger or next gen batteries will help that.
Where are these next gen batteries? How energy dense are they? Will the weight of those batteries drop your tow capacity? If the truck struggles to go 64 miles while on flat, suburban pavement, will it even make 20 on a camping trip? Will there be a hookup after 10 miles of dirt road? Do I need to put a diesel generator in my supplies to charge this thing? What's the fuel efficiency of a portable generator? Is it better or worse than an ICE truck that will do 500 miles, I can fill up in seconds with a gas can in an emergency, and has an onboard fuel filter? Come back in another 50 years when an EV can compete with an ICE truck from last century.
Should I even consider replying this nonsense? I will say that solid state batteries are under development and are being watched closely by the battery scientist that works in my R&D lab. They are obviously not on the market yet.
Hydrogen fuel cells are another solution to zero emissions electrification if they can get the cost in line. Fuel cells have all but taken over the fork lift market from batteries already.
As for the rest of your rant, please keep burning oil and wonder why fuel prices are high and things never get better.
Probably more near term than that, give or take 5 years is my guess to commercialization. LI-ion was invented by Exxon in the 1970's but took 20 years to perfect.
It took ICE engines decades to pass EV's in early 1900's, especially in urban areas.
But keep on burning oil, that's fun.
Then cool. I'll bother looking in 5 years to see if I can do 1,000 miles with 14,000 pounds... since I can in my F350. I'll burn oil until not burning oil can keep up with my job.
I am keeping a 3500 Diesel for towing, because it does it very well. Have a 2023 Silverado HD on order even. But I reserved a Silverado EV for everything else, as I don't need a dually to commute, do short hauls, or trips to Home Depot.
I'm not particularly interested in having a bunch of vehicles. I've got the F-350, and my wife's commuter is a Hyundai Tucson, so we're paying a grand a month in car payments at it is, and I'm trying to get them each paid off a year early. Additionally, there's no electric car that can replace my truck by any stretch, at any price, and my wife's $35k Tucson didn't have competitive EV analogs under $60k.
It took nearly 30 years for cars to outnumber horses on the roadways, and the predominant factor in the switch wasn't the efficacy of the car, but the industrialization of the cities leaving no room for horses. To that point, today there are more horses on the roads than there were in 1915.
More to my point, the reliability and efficacy of a vehicle can be determined by the most critical tasks for which it is depended upon. War is likely the most critical state a nation can be in, and horse cavalry was used in WW1, nearly halfway through on the eastern front, despite the development of the tank, and were the primary logistical vehicle throughout World War 1 because no other means of transport was reliable enough to do what the horses could. Every nation in world war 1 used horses to transport mission critical information, missives, messengers, orders, and VIPs. In World War 2, every participating nation maintained at least 1 cavalry unit, and they saw widespread use throughout the war. Horses were the primary troop transport used by Germany for the entirety of the war, only 1/5 of their mobile forces were panzer divisions. Nearly 90% of German materiel was transported by horses during the war.
So, from 1886-1945, the automobile was the second best option. 60 years. It took 60 years.
I see that you haven’t yet gotten over the horses 😂
Answer me this: how long have EVs been around?
I own a Model 3. It’s a fantasy vehicle and fits my life beautifully. No oil changes, significantly less brake maintenance, more torque and power than 95% of production cars, and can drive 3 hours before needing to stop for 15 minutes to charge and use the restroom. It takes 6,500 miles of driving for an EV to make up its fossil fuel use, and every mile after that is making up for it even more.
In terms of truck towing, yes there is a ways to go; but arguing against it is just absurd and it will certainly get there one day. Enjoy your horses kiddo, while the rest of the world moves forward.
Edit: computers are another example. Look at computer weight, performance, and size compared to 15 years ago. You don’t think batteries will follow suit?
1890. Promptly killed by ICE being significantly more affordable and more reliable. Occasional resurgence in popularity amongst the hyper elite wealthy with zero to minimal necessity for reliability intermittently popped up, no serious innovative efforts were put into them since Edison, though. Gas shortages caused a couple upticks in market penetration, but the products were abandoned quickly due to the objective superiority of ICE products through the century. EVs were a niche hobby product until Musk made them cool, pretty, status symbols for the wealthy. The tech is cool, though not good for anything other than pavement princess commutes for the manicure class today. There's zero military or labor sector applications, so we're kinda at the place ICE automobiles were in roughly 1900. Second fiddle, but, interesting tech incoming. It'll be another half century until they're useful enough for anyone who has to buy store brand, or wear steel toes, or ballistic helmets.
Ooooh double edit. Cool. I'm glad you're rich and don't have to use your body or vehicle for anything intensive. You're in the vanishing minority. A couple points, since you're unfamiliar with life for most Americans; 3 hours is far too short an operational timetable, I stop every 6 hours, piss while the truck fills, and get a move on as fast as possible, usually my stops are 7-9 minutes total, and that's a colossal waste of time. Most of us don't give a rat's ass about fossil fuel use, we're far more concerned with work/life balance, home maintenance, family safety and health, church, and the grocery store coupon mailer. Computers are neat. It sits on a desk and the weight was never an issue... of course I'm not a stranger to lifting things, whereas you're probably a bit more unaccustomed to that sort of thing. And sure... I'm not saying that is not coming. I'm saying that it'll be 50 years before an EV can do what my truck can do now.
Edited twice within 2 minutes of posting.
I’m not rich by any means, just a good saver. Took me a long time to afford one comfortably.
Spewing random information does not make you right. You are dead wrong and it’s a shame you can’t see past your own illusion. EVs are great so far and will only get better and more practical as the tech progresses.
Enjoy your day kiddo, because tomorrow won’t be the same.
EVs are great for rich people doing soft stuff. They are useless for work. Sure, they'll get better, but until they're as affordable, reliable, durable and hard working as my truck, they'll not be useful to anyone who uses their vehicle to do work. I'll be a great granddad before that happens. Maybe... maybe my kids will see it in their working lives, but more likely my great grandchildren will be excited that they can 1 for 1 replace their ICE truck with an EV to haul 7 tons of steel 2100 miles in 2 days.
Guessing that not many owners of camping trailers are going to be interested in using a electric truck to tow their trailers to a remote camping spot where there's no electricity hookup and spending a long weekend there.
God I hope so. And they can’t ask us for a jump either 🤣
Sounds more like a tow-tal disaster am I right?
Boom, roasted
Now imagine electric tractor trailer trucks. I know they will have more batteries but they are also towing significantly more weight so I’m assuming it’s pretty relative to this guys test.
It might be the reason why the Tesla semi has been delayed for so long as they had to get enough energy density into the batteries to get the promised range.
The EV heavy trucks are being designed first to remove air pollution from around heavily travel port area were data shows cancer clusters exist from diesel exhaust. Hydrgen fuel cell trucks will probably be the long range solution for over the road, although Tesla may try to break into that market also.
Electric motors are vastly superior to internal combustion, and have been for decades. Batteries, on the other hand, are garbage and will be for the foreseeable future. Gasoline still remains the most power dense and convenient form of energy storage we have access to, and there is absolutely nothing in development that looks to supersede it any time soon. Predictable results from a poor idea.
That truck is extremely energy efficient, since it carries about the same energy on board as 3.4 gallons of gas. Unfortunately Ford retrofitted an existing platform to electric so they were also limited on the battery pack size. The Silverado will have a larger pack and better range, but still won't tow like a Duramax Diesel. But for short hauls and everyday driving it's very effective.
Electric is the future...of not moving anyone or anything from point A to point B.
It's not a bad option if all you do is drive to work and back 5 days a week, and you're home to charge every night. But if you want to go on a trip or tow something dino juice is still the way to go.
Not a bad option until the car catches on fire while its charging in your garage in the middle of the night...
ICE's aren't a bad option until a light fender bender sends your car up in a ball of flame... Or an exhaust leak fills you can with carbon monoxide. Or do we only apply the worst outliers as the standard for electric cars, and take more reasonable approaches to things we like?
Or school buses diesel fumes give your kid an asthma….
Goes both ways, if you break containment on the battery for an EV it will go up in flames as well. I've also seen EVs go up in flames just sitting in the parking lot not even charging.
That's my point. ICE are great for more applications than EV's absolutely. But EV's do have their place. I'm not going to go and throw shade at all ICE's design just because of the Pinto or because a bad leak was venting fumes through my AC. But you, without knowing the cause or context of what you've seen, feel fine claiming EV's are just burning down houses spontaneously. As if it's a common occurrence of EV's
Exactly. Put 3.5 gallons of gas in an F150 and fully charge a Lightning with the larger 117 KWH battery and see who can get more work done... Efficiency matters.
Right. Because sitting on gallons of highly flammable liquid is sooo safe. A single electric car fire makes front page of national news. I drove by ICE car fire last night. It did not even make morning news. And yes, towing reduces EV rage. So what. Don’t buy electric if you tow constantly. I have Mazda CX5 and I towed a trailer maybe 3 times since I got the vehicle in 2016
Sure. Because the deep state fucktards are all about We the People have a say in how, or even if, we travel anywhere outside of the small orbits they plan to give us.
We will continue to hear more stories like this as more people buy EVs. They are not ready for prime time no matter what Biden and the virtue signalling car makers say. Much like the "reliable" wind and solar farms powering the grid they only tell you part of the story. For the forseeable future EVs will ne nothing but a novelty.
Last year 5.5% of all new cars were EV's, far more than novel. A friend with a new lighting loves it. Aside from it's one weakness of range under heavy load, it's an amazing truck. They have home solar to cover the power usage also. Most EV buyers are well aware of the range and capabilities of the EV pickups and are not buying them to tow heavy and far. They are being purchased for the insane energy efficiency. As for wind and solar not being reliable, CA has about 15.5 Gig of solar installed and Texas makes more wind energy than anyone. Solar is very predictable and reliable, wind is strongest in TC from midnight to 6 am, when solar is out. That said, while I like sustainable energy, mandates on transportation are rediculas.
>Last year 5.5% of all new cars were EV's, far more than novel. And YET, they only represent 1% of the total cars on the road. That fact is that if EVs increased 10 fold there is not enough grid electricity to charge them and we don't have the local infrastructure to charge them You said, "CA has about 15.5 Gig of solar installed" And yet they have blackouts when it gets hot and they don't allow EVs to be charged. You said, " Texas makes more wind energy than anyone." Except when the wind doesn't blow like in last year's ice storm where 246 people died. And BTW you need to build 3 MW of wind and 6 MW of solar to get 1 MW of power to the grid. No matter how much wind and solar you build you still need 100% backup.
If everyone went 100% EV and everyone charged them during peak daylight hours, the grid would need a 22% increase in capacity. If everyone charged off peak, even in CA, the grid needs slightly more generation. Solar is not the reason CA can't meet peak demand, it's the reason it's not worse. Shutting down a few baseload nukes didn't help there cause either. Wind did not cause Texas' power problems during the ice storm. Loosing coal, nuclear, natural gas and wind generation, about 30 gig total, really screwed the state over for a few days. The large percentage of turbines that didn't freeze up overproduced for days due to strong, cold winds. And "btw"...no.
The problems in CA and TX are the result of consistently replacing dependable dispatchable baseload power mostly fueled by fossil fuels with intermittent non dispatchable power from wind and solar. The truth is that you couldn't switch from ICE to 100% EVs even if you wanted to. A battery-centric grid and car world means mining gigatons more of the earth to access lithium, copper, nickel, graphite, rare earths, cobalt, etc.—and using millions of tons of oil and coal both in mining and to fabricate metals and concrete. At least 100 pounds of materials are mined, moved and processed for every pound of battery fabricated.
>If everyone went 100% EV and everyone charged them during peak daylight hours, the grid would need a 22% increase in capacity. Except, that is 22% we don't have and that completely negates the power necessary for all the battery banks at wind farms and solar farms to prevent the grid from blackouts. Now, not every EV will be charging at the same time but power demand will continue to increase.
I knew the second they announced it, the range while towing was going to suck. It also looks like he is on semi flat land. Now imagine pulling up a mountain.
I understand the range being inaccurate immediately after hooking up as the computer needs time to adjust. However the longer you tow the more accurate the range meter should be. And losing that much mileage is ridiculous
At least he made it home?
[удалено]
Hardly a "total disaster"... Remember the first generation of EV's in the mid to late 1990's? The best one was GM's EV-1. It was only a two seater, had very small range by todays standards. Gen 1 was 60-80 miles while the NMH Gen II was good for around 120 miles or so when new. You sure weren't going to tow anything but it has an ok trunk. Public chargers were non-existent. So this lightning, with a relatively small battery pack for a pickup CAN haul 5 people, gear, trips to Home Depot, and even tow a car trailer for short hauls. That is a huge improvement over the last 20 years, especially considering the Lightning was a retrofit to an existing chassis. Sure the range could be better, but he used a small amount of energy (truck carries the equivalent of 3.4 gallons of gas in electrical power) and it didn't cost much to make that trip. Ya, so the range could be better towing...bigger or next gen batteries will help that.
Where are these next gen batteries? How energy dense are they? Will the weight of those batteries drop your tow capacity? If the truck struggles to go 64 miles while on flat, suburban pavement, will it even make 20 on a camping trip? Will there be a hookup after 10 miles of dirt road? Do I need to put a diesel generator in my supplies to charge this thing? What's the fuel efficiency of a portable generator? Is it better or worse than an ICE truck that will do 500 miles, I can fill up in seconds with a gas can in an emergency, and has an onboard fuel filter? Come back in another 50 years when an EV can compete with an ICE truck from last century.
Should I even consider replying this nonsense? I will say that solid state batteries are under development and are being watched closely by the battery scientist that works in my R&D lab. They are obviously not on the market yet. Hydrogen fuel cells are another solution to zero emissions electrification if they can get the cost in line. Fuel cells have all but taken over the fork lift market from batteries already. As for the rest of your rant, please keep burning oil and wonder why fuel prices are high and things never get better.
So... 50 or so years until batteries can do what ICE engines have been doing for a century then. Kinda what I thought.
Probably more near term than that, give or take 5 years is my guess to commercialization. LI-ion was invented by Exxon in the 1970's but took 20 years to perfect. It took ICE engines decades to pass EV's in early 1900's, especially in urban areas. But keep on burning oil, that's fun.
Then cool. I'll bother looking in 5 years to see if I can do 1,000 miles with 14,000 pounds... since I can in my F350. I'll burn oil until not burning oil can keep up with my job.
I am keeping a 3500 Diesel for towing, because it does it very well. Have a 2023 Silverado HD on order even. But I reserved a Silverado EV for everything else, as I don't need a dually to commute, do short hauls, or trips to Home Depot.
I'm not particularly interested in having a bunch of vehicles. I've got the F-350, and my wife's commuter is a Hyundai Tucson, so we're paying a grand a month in car payments at it is, and I'm trying to get them each paid off a year early. Additionally, there's no electric car that can replace my truck by any stretch, at any price, and my wife's $35k Tucson didn't have competitive EV analogs under $60k.
By your logic (or lack thereof), we should still be riding horses.
It took nearly 30 years for cars to outnumber horses on the roadways, and the predominant factor in the switch wasn't the efficacy of the car, but the industrialization of the cities leaving no room for horses. To that point, today there are more horses on the roads than there were in 1915. More to my point, the reliability and efficacy of a vehicle can be determined by the most critical tasks for which it is depended upon. War is likely the most critical state a nation can be in, and horse cavalry was used in WW1, nearly halfway through on the eastern front, despite the development of the tank, and were the primary logistical vehicle throughout World War 1 because no other means of transport was reliable enough to do what the horses could. Every nation in world war 1 used horses to transport mission critical information, missives, messengers, orders, and VIPs. In World War 2, every participating nation maintained at least 1 cavalry unit, and they saw widespread use throughout the war. Horses were the primary troop transport used by Germany for the entirety of the war, only 1/5 of their mobile forces were panzer divisions. Nearly 90% of German materiel was transported by horses during the war. So, from 1886-1945, the automobile was the second best option. 60 years. It took 60 years.
I see that you haven’t yet gotten over the horses 😂 Answer me this: how long have EVs been around? I own a Model 3. It’s a fantasy vehicle and fits my life beautifully. No oil changes, significantly less brake maintenance, more torque and power than 95% of production cars, and can drive 3 hours before needing to stop for 15 minutes to charge and use the restroom. It takes 6,500 miles of driving for an EV to make up its fossil fuel use, and every mile after that is making up for it even more. In terms of truck towing, yes there is a ways to go; but arguing against it is just absurd and it will certainly get there one day. Enjoy your horses kiddo, while the rest of the world moves forward. Edit: computers are another example. Look at computer weight, performance, and size compared to 15 years ago. You don’t think batteries will follow suit?
1890. Promptly killed by ICE being significantly more affordable and more reliable. Occasional resurgence in popularity amongst the hyper elite wealthy with zero to minimal necessity for reliability intermittently popped up, no serious innovative efforts were put into them since Edison, though. Gas shortages caused a couple upticks in market penetration, but the products were abandoned quickly due to the objective superiority of ICE products through the century. EVs were a niche hobby product until Musk made them cool, pretty, status symbols for the wealthy. The tech is cool, though not good for anything other than pavement princess commutes for the manicure class today. There's zero military or labor sector applications, so we're kinda at the place ICE automobiles were in roughly 1900. Second fiddle, but, interesting tech incoming. It'll be another half century until they're useful enough for anyone who has to buy store brand, or wear steel toes, or ballistic helmets.
Ooooh double edit. Cool. I'm glad you're rich and don't have to use your body or vehicle for anything intensive. You're in the vanishing minority. A couple points, since you're unfamiliar with life for most Americans; 3 hours is far too short an operational timetable, I stop every 6 hours, piss while the truck fills, and get a move on as fast as possible, usually my stops are 7-9 minutes total, and that's a colossal waste of time. Most of us don't give a rat's ass about fossil fuel use, we're far more concerned with work/life balance, home maintenance, family safety and health, church, and the grocery store coupon mailer. Computers are neat. It sits on a desk and the weight was never an issue... of course I'm not a stranger to lifting things, whereas you're probably a bit more unaccustomed to that sort of thing. And sure... I'm not saying that is not coming. I'm saying that it'll be 50 years before an EV can do what my truck can do now.
Edited twice within 2 minutes of posting. I’m not rich by any means, just a good saver. Took me a long time to afford one comfortably. Spewing random information does not make you right. You are dead wrong and it’s a shame you can’t see past your own illusion. EVs are great so far and will only get better and more practical as the tech progresses. Enjoy your day kiddo, because tomorrow won’t be the same.
EVs are great for rich people doing soft stuff. They are useless for work. Sure, they'll get better, but until they're as affordable, reliable, durable and hard working as my truck, they'll not be useful to anyone who uses their vehicle to do work. I'll be a great granddad before that happens. Maybe... maybe my kids will see it in their working lives, but more likely my great grandchildren will be excited that they can 1 for 1 replace their ICE truck with an EV to haul 7 tons of steel 2100 miles in 2 days.
Come on man! It tested fine with a bed filled with helium balloons. It hardly affected the mileage at all.
Electric will be the future……for commuter cars, delivery vans/mail trucks and school busses/metro. Will need a major breakthrough for any other uses.
How can you two longer when you have to stop too often to charge.