Cummins Unveils Electric Semi Truck Before Tesla (autoblog.com)
Cummins has beat Tesla to the punch by unveiling its own electric semi truck. According to Forbes, the fully electric, class 7 day-cab urban hauler, called Aeos, gets 100 miles of range from its 140-kWh battery pack and can haul a 22-ton trailer. While the company does offer the options of additional battery packs to triple the range or a range-extending engine generator, the Aeos is better suited for city use rather than long-haul trucking. Autoblog reports: While this electric truck is a concept, it's a working demonstration of a product Cummins plans to start producing in 2019. At the unveiling in Columbus, Ind., Cummins also revealed its latest near-zero-emissions natural gas engines, as well as the X15 and lightweight X12 clean diesel engines. The company said it is embracing new technologies that allow its customers to contribute to a sustainable future.
No such thing occurred, but I guess that's more creative than "fr1st p05t!"
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
we've seen hundreds of Tesla-killer prototypes and promises. What we haven't seen to date, though, is a company other than Tesla who can actually deliver a production electric vehicle that people really want to drive.
disclosure: i'm a Tesla owner (and it's by far the best vehicle i've ever owned by an extremely wide margin)
i could live a little longer in this prison
While people may think this is trying to steal Tesla's thunder, you should remember that Tesla Motors wasn't started to make a buck, it was started to prove the viability and promotion of electric vehicles. The fact that other companies want to jump on the bandwagon isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing because it means that the plan behind Tesla is working. If you only like Telsa for the money aspect, you can suck it. ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Wear down? You mean degrade? If so, no, that's not "the way it is in electric cars".
Driving on modern EVs is much less stressful than charging. A 300 mile Tesla driving at 70 mph discharges fully in 4,3 hours. It can then fill up half its pack in 20 minutes. The rate of putting energy into packs is much higher than the rate of taking them out, unless you're driving full out on the track.
Secondly, supercharging has little to no impact on a Tesla pack's life, as confirmed by numerous comparisons. Nor is degradation even much of an issue at all, period. Here is collected data on Tesla vehicles. Click on "charts". You'll see that typical degradation is about 4% in the first year of ownership, and then it strongly declines; after five years, the average total degradation is about 6-7%. Roadster owners (aka much older vehicles) usually report about 10% degradation. Tesla warranties their packs for 8 years (with unlimited miles on the S and X). And 8 year battery warranties are actually pretty much the industry standard these days.
That of course doesn't mean that you can't make a bad battery pack; it's actually easy. Early Leafs had bad problems with degradation in hot climates, for example, because their packs are only passively cooled rather than climate controlled (they still suffer worse degradation than Teslas, but they're not as bad as they used to be). It all comes down to what type of cells you use (because chemistry / design greatly affects properties; all li-ions are most definitely not equal) and how much you baby them.
You are however correct that freeway driving on EVs is much less energy (not power) efficient than in the city. EV ranges, however (at least for passenger vehicles - I've never looked into semis) are rated on the EPA 5-cycle or an equivalency metric (such as US-06 times a downward adjustment factor of 0.7). They're for "normal" highway driving, supposed to be an average of how people drive. That said, if you drive faster than average, you'll get significantly poorer performance. On the flipside, if you're a slowpoke, you'll significantly exceed the range.
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
Cummins will not have built their own battery pack, so the difficulty of making a pack is irrelevant. But the point about this just being a demonstrator is completely valid. Let us know when they have something on the road.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Recursion (n): See 'Recursion'.
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
Presumably only if they're not counting CO2, unless somehow they've changed the laws of physics. More half truth marketing which makes me suspicious of all their claims.
What we haven't seen to date, though, is a company other than Tesla who can actually deliver a production electric vehicle that people really want to drive.
Like Renault ? Who's been putting electric vehicles on the market for quite some time (cooperating with Nissan) (Covering a whole range of uses cases: Twizzy, Zoe, Megan, Kangoo)
Like Citroen ? Whose electric truck have been used by French postal services since the 90s ? (who needs extreme range when 20km is about as far as a your regular delivery route goes ?)
On the other hand: all of the above are European manufacturer, and Europe's densely populated cities are just ripe for EV (even back when these used to have ridiculously short ranges), and lots of country have electricity production that doesn't even rely on burning fossils.
What Tesla managed is to find a way to make it marketable in the US, mostly by a combination of getting around US' "range anxiety" problems (mostly using off-the-shelf cells for the batteries, and integrating as much as possible the production to keep the costs low even with the ginormous battery) and doing very well executed marketing campaign (they managed to make the cars look sexy in their consumers' minds).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Actually, EVs tend to go further in low-speed stop-and-go conditions than they do at high speeds. EV range is strongly correlated to velocity. Gasoline engines cancel out the increased aero losses at speed by the increased efficiency they gain from being in a higher torque regime. Gasoline vehicles (excepting hybrids) also do not regen, and they idle at stops.
What hat are you pulling that "eight plus hours" from? I have no clue what Cummins' plans are (presumption: "not much"), but long charge times has never been part of Tesla's game plan. Tesla battery packs are generally designed to fill approximately 50% in ~20 minutes, to 80% in ~40, and then taper down from there. Semi's launch will correspond with the rollout of Supercharger V3. All that we know about V3 is that it will be battery buffered (so the grid doesn't limit how fast it can discharge), and that it will make 350kW look like "a childrens' toy". Current superchargers are 145kW / max 120kW per stall (2 stalls per charger).
So if you were driving, say, 70mph (go ahead and fill in the details yourself), that would be 5,7h, meaning somewhere on the ballpark of one hour of charging spread out over the course of your day of Tesla goes with fast charging for semi, even less if they go for battery swap (some people think they will; I do not). Whoop-di-doo. Fuel costs generally are double driver salaries anyway for a fleet operator. Also worth noting that in the EU, a driver isn't even allowed to drive more than 4,5 hours without 45 minutes of total breaks.
Again, this article is about Cummins, but anyway, EPA ranges are based on the 5-cycle or an equivalence factor thereof. It's actually quite realistic. If you want a cycle to complain about, it's Europe's reliance on the ridiculous NEDC (it inflates EV ranges by 15-20%).
Grades are big loss factors for ICE vehicles, but not for EVs. An EV that rolls down the opposite side without regen loses almost nothing at all. If it has to regen, losses of the energy spent in climbing are generally only 25-50%, depending on the efficiency of the motor and battery. In the real world, the vast majority of climbing energy is recovered via rolldown rather than regen, and hence practical losses are very minimal.
Which is why cutting fuel costs in half in the US, and by 60-85% in Europe, is a Big Freaking Deal.
Are you trying to hit all of the selling points? The fact that it's leased makes it much easier because even if you have to pay a higher lease payment each month, you're saving much more than that in fuel payments each month, so it makes it a no brainer.
Tesla's Model 3 comes in at pretty much the same weight as other competitors in its class (BMW 3-Series, Audi A-4, Mercedes C350, etc). Semi will be no different. The packs on Semi will probably come in around 2 tonnes, give or take (it'll be easier to say once we're given exact specs). The drive units will add another 0,5 tonne or so. Compared to the weight of the engine and transmission they're replacing, that's not that much.
It will also almost certainly be the most powerful diesel truck ever. Expect
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
A 300 mile Tesla driving at 70 mph discharges fully in 4,3 hours. It can then fill up half its pack in 20 minutes.
Wow, it must be a lot of fun driving across the country driving 2 hours at a time and having to wait 20 minutes between each leg.
Why are you driving 150MPH?
What is a semi truck? Half truck, half... what?
It's a lorry that is only half aroused.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Depends on where you are. What word works for you? Lorry? Vörubíll? ;)
My understanding of the US term is that it's because they haul semi-trailers. "Semi-trailers" because they don't have front wheels, and are thus not complete trailers.
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
(The volcanic island is, of course, Musk's personal lair and only open to his top henchmen)
He's just being nice so my real father won't freeze him in carbonite and sell him for spice.
You can't win this argument. There seems to be a set of people that are convinced that unless you can do these marathon drives...by which I define it as driving until your tank gets to zero, filling up while you use the restroom and grab a package of beef jerky and a soda and then jumping back in to drive another 400 miles...if you can't do that in your car it's not "practical."
The folks who require this are certainly not a non-zero number. As evidenced by the folks who make this argument. Alternatively, the folks making the argument aren't these kind of people, but like to believe that there are many of them out there. Regardless, if that's your requirement, great, use a gasoline car for now.
For the rest of us, self included as a Tesla owner, I do road trips 300 miles in a day. I have a toddler and a dog. After 3 hours in the car I'm GLAD to get out of the car for a 30-40 minute lunch break, thank you very much. I do remember doing 600 mile drives when I was in my teens and twenties and I'm seriously glad I gave up on that and I hope that the number of times I have to do it again in my lifetime are limited to a number I can count on two hands.
While this post is funny, I actually kind of think that Musk probably is a little bit tickled by this. Remember that this is the guy that gave away a bunch of patents related to charging and what-not... and I've never seen Tesla themselves do "head to head" competitive events to prove how the Tesla is better than ... he usually leaves it to the magazines and pundits to do that for him. I think the reason is that he wants to make a better world(s) more than he wants to make money. Therefore electric semi trucks that compete with his trucks are still achieving his goal.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?