Engineering Explained:Why Tesla's Are Bad at Towing

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by ldjessee00

1% of US Sales, world wide sales, or something else? Not sure what your 1% number is referring to. I know in some countries, it is now over 50% of sales. (Norway)

1% is US sales. The Norway comment is meant to mislead people because they aren't relevant. It has the population of South Carolina, about midway in population size of our 50 states. They could all drive monster trucks and it wouldn't matter.

How do you think a transition from ICE to BEV will look like? That during a transition, it would not start at a low percentage and build? And that some where during that transition it will have still less sales, but more and more manufacturers make more models available in some electrified format?

Slow, very slow. It's been over a decade now, and we've reached 1% sales. The problem with EV sales isn't lack of models, or lack of charging infrastructure... the problem with EVs in general is the terrible battery.

But as companies invest in battery technology because batteries are driving so many consumer electronics right now, any advancement would be a huge payday. So, this keeps companies investing, but it has to show promise, improvements, and technology does advance. If you had not noticed, the pace of change has picked up lately.

Pace of what change? Technology innovation is stagnating in general. New iPhones are 0.2mm thinner, have stupid notched screens, and eliminated stereo jacks. The Chevy Bolt EV gained 8% driving range from 2016 until now.

All warehouses used to all be on train spikes and trucks were only for local distribution...but that is not true anymore here in the US, but world wide... well, some countries kept up on keeping train technology up to date, so train is faster, cheaper, and a better way to travel in many countries.

If I wanted to ship iron ore or coal, by air hardly makes any sense.

Weight, density, and priority are all factors now.

You've mentioned "keeping train technology up to date" several times now. What technology does the US lack that others have? There haven't been technological innovation in trains that is worth mentioning, or that would create a paradigm shift in transport. What your comments sound like to me is that you have the perfect solution to transport, and that the way the US does things is stupid.

I'm sure we'll see incremental improvement in all areas of transport, but I don't see any huge disruptions or big ideas yet to be implemented. The trucking industry is already competitive, so they have already considered aero improvements. Raw materials already ship by train.

My WAG for the nearterm automotive industry is an increase of plug-in hybrid sales. A 16 kWh battery captures the full federal tax credit, yet isn't so large that it drives the cost to manufacture way up. In fact, played correctly, there is about $300 of profit for every kWh of that 16 kWh battery, or $4,800.

[ldjessee00]

Redpoint5,

I suppose Japan and Europe in general are irrelevant as well?

I have an electric car that does great as a commuter, and is actually a better than another small car I bought in the past to fill the same role. Batteries are terrible at what metric compared to what?

Current batteries do not store the same energy as fossil fuels, but with electric drive trains being so much more efficient, we actually do not need them to be. And, the amount of money spent just to get fuel out of the ground and refine it into a usable form can be eliminated, as well as all the pollution (oil spills alone, without even talking about the burn off or other pollution caused by fossil fuels).

Sales of ICE cars are dropping and EVs sales are increasing. I have not found anything that says EVs were 1% of car sales in the US for 2019. Where did you get this information? I have not even found a solid number for the number of cars sold in the US for 2019, let alone the percentage of those sales that were EV.

Hahaha, the comment about technology stagnating, now I am not sure if you are just trolling me or not...

If you think the only difference between one model of phone and the next is measured by the outside dimensions and that headphone jack was removed, either you are willfully ignorant or here to troll. Which is it?

In case you are ignorant, if you look at the battery life, computing power, and expansive amount of tasks that you can do with a phone compared to 10 years or 20 years ago, you might understand better. The fact that an iPhone would qualify as a super computer in the early 90s and has more graphics processing than special effects computers used for major motion pictures in the late 90s... and does all of that at a microscopic fraction of the power used by computers in the 90s... If that does not impress you, or atleast have you reconsider your stagnant technology, nothing will.

And just because a company does not implement technology, does not mean it is not out there and is not implemented by someone else. There is a whole other conversation about patents, time limits, and monopolies that could be had as to why it seems some market segments takes longer to innovate than others...

The US train system fell to the way side due to a combination of several things. The US being flooded by surplus trucks, mechanics, and drivers after WW2. Also, greedy train companies not wanting to spend the money on improving their infrastructure. Europe in rebuilding from WW2 got to put in new, more consolidated tracks, and when the technology came about for high speed trains, they invested (companies, countries, people) in getting those implemented.

Is inefficiency stupid? I usually think so. I understand how it came to be in the US. Cheap gas, lots of trucks and drivers, then throw in the national highway system... you have an infrastructure that is newer than trains, can get things there faster, and because the government is keeping up the roads, the trucking companies do not have to maintain the infrastructure, so with all of those costs deferred, it became cheaper to ship things fast with trucks...

Technologies not implemented in the US for trains? You want a list or do you actually not know that almost no country continues to use wooden ties for the tracks? That even older rails systems can be operated with faster trains by improving the suspension on those trains. I road in such a 'transitional' train in Sweden. It was not considered a high speed train there, as it never got up to a 100 mph, but for most of my trip from Malmo to Stockholm it was going 72 mph on unimproved tracks.

To allow for true high speed trains, the rail system has to be upgraded. Like no road/track crossings, because 100s of tons going over 100 mph and it hits a car or truck stuck on the tracks will be very bad. Curves have to be more open.. These kind of improvements to the infrastructure as well as train traffic control and trains in general.

Japan and China are building maglev trains. Magnetic Levitation. But we do not even have high speed trains here, not even long distance electric trains. The US is behind. We could implement these things, but we have not. And yes, it would cost, but would it cost as much as maintaining the national highway system? Would it cost as much as the F-22 or F-35 programs? I bring them up, as they are trillion dollar projects that we, as a nation, paid for. If the US wanted to start a program to upgrade its rail infrastructure to even just highspeed rail standards, we could do so. It might actually help the economy... but we would still be behind and not the leaders.. which right now seem to be Japan and China's maglev trains.

I do not claim to have the perfect solution, but I can look around the world, being lucky enough to have been outside the US, and see how others are doing some things better than the US. I want my native country to be better at things. When I was in Korea, the train system was better than it was where I came from... at the time atleast. It is only since then did I come to find out that Indiana actually had several commuter train systems that brought people 30 to 50 miles from the surrounding areas to Indianapolis everyday... But that was before WW2.

I used to think plugin hybrid would be good enough, but once it was pointed out that vehicles are lugging around two different systems to do the same thing, hampering both, I realized they were just not good enough. Pure EVs is the way to go. I personally think a combination of super capacitors and batteries would solve many issues and maybe allow EVs to fill even more niches currently thought of as only being able to be served by ICE engines.

Tesla, and others, have proven they can make EVs with decent range (over 200 miles).
I have an EV that during the summer is lucky to have 100 miles of real world range, and yet it works great for what we wanted it for, which is what 80% of people in the US need (a car that lets them commute to and from work, under 50 miles a day).

The tax incentive helped convince me to buy my first EV, but now that I have one I do not care anymore, I want to replace my other car with an EV, with or without tax incentive. Owning an EV is such a better experience than a gas car.

But, I also understand my prospective is not everyone else's...

[aerohead]

I just added some information about trailer gap aerodynamics at #1-permalink) on page one.

[aerohead]

I just added some data on trailer drag reduction technology,at the bottom of the original post,at #1(permalink),page-1.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by Bajascoob

A Tesla you can start to “fill” walk away, take a pee, grab a drink maybe a snack, jump back in and leave...you don’t have to stand there, park, take a pee...etc. most people don’t have a 400mile bladder.

I can take a pee, and grab a snack in 5 minutes. How much of a charge do I get in 5 minutes? 20 miles maybe. 20 min later I don't need to take a pee and grab a snack again to get another 20 miles.

[ldjessee00]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

I can take a pee, and grab a snack in 5 minutes. How much of a charge do I get in 5 minutes? 20 miles maybe. 20 min later I don't need to take a pee and grab a snack again to get another 20 miles.

Model 3 on a V3 Supercharger is the maximum charge rate and it depends on how empty the battery is. According to their tests, they could add 60 miles in just under 5 minutes... Wait 11 minutes and it will have added 150 miles of range... which would cover me for another 2 hours of highway driving.

But you must be either sprinting through the gas station, or wearing a kilt or something, to get all that done in under 5 minutes. Most people cannot do all that with a gas car in 5 minutes. With an EV, you can plug in and walk away. I know a few places that is illegal with a gas car...

I have taken more than 5 minutes to put 15 gallons in my car at some gas stations due to slow pumps...

Also, after driving for more than 2 hours, I want a bit of a walk around, but maybe I will need less 'downtime' if I had active cruise control and such.

I know when I was younger, I would go like 3 to 4 hours without stopping, but then again, young does not always equal smart...

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by aerohead

trailer gap data/ trailer drag reduction data

I ran the additions through MacOS Summarize Service to cut throguh the obfuscated punctuation:

*In 1982,the 'Trailer Dome',of Fibrelock Fabrics Ltd,of Dorset,England,demonstrated a drag reduction,from 32%-to-52%,by eliminating all but 2.8% of trailer gap, with an inflated bulbous nose on a caravan trailer.

...*Sloped-nose and V-nose trailers have deceptive drag liabilities,as beneficial stagnation bubbles of 'blunt-nosed' trailers are absent,to the detriment of both towing vehicle,but trailer as well.Hucho illustrates the lack of any drag advantage of sloped-nose trailers.Owner testimonials relate the same observations concerning V-nose trailers.

*Presently,in the world of RVs,the least offensive gap belongs to motorhomes, pulling toy haulers of smaller frontal area,such that the trailer becomes a wake rider,stuffing the wake, approximating a solid box cavity;organizing the motorhome's wake and delivering the resulting flow to a separation point of smaller cross-section and higher base pressure.

...*Online,an RV owner shared his experiment with a 2007 Toyota Tundra,pulling a Layton Skyline travel trailer.His original 8-MPG improved to 9-MPG with the addition of a full tonneau cover,then by tilting the tonneau up,as a air-deflector,fuel economy rose to an average 11.5 MPG.

...*Pat Nixon of Texas Tech, put some video together for me back in 1991,when we were doing the Becker-Lyon BMW LSR Bonneville motorcycle streamliner project.It included video of the T-T truck research,in which the fifth wheel bulbous nose did about as much good as anything the crew experimented with.A lesson not lost on Airstream,Casita,SCAMP,Happier Camper,ARGOSSY,..................

*Both BamZipPow and I are running zero-gap trailers.I'll let him tell his story over at his thread.So far,with an incomplete project,I'm sitting at delta-zero mpg pulling mine.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by ldjessee00

Model 3 on a V3 Supercharger is the maximum charge rate and it depends on how empty the battery is. According to their tests, they could add 60 miles in just under 5 minutes... Wait 11 minutes and it will have added 150 miles of range... which would cover me for another 2 hours of highway driving.

But you must be either sprinting through the gas station, or wearing a kilt or something, to get all that done in under 5 minutes. Most people cannot do all that with a gas car in 5 minutes. With an EV, you can plug in and walk away. I know a few places that is illegal with a gas car...

I have taken more than 5 minutes to put 15 gallons in my car at some gas stations due to slow pumps...

Also, after driving for more than 2 hours, I want a bit of a walk around, but maybe I will need less 'downtime' if I had active cruise control and such.

I know when I was younger, I would go like 3 to 4 hours without stopping, but then again, young does not always equal smart...

With more stops you also have to consider the time to exit, find the supercharger, then connect, pay, charge, disconnect, then go back to the on ramp and get back up to speed. So now the 11 min stop is more like 1/2 hour total every 2 hours. Also if I do have the time to stop and smell the Rose's I don't want to be anywhere near the major interstates where those chargers can be found. I'm likely on some Montana back road where I'm lucky to find a simple level 2 charger and they will be few and far between. Likely I'd have to depend on the simple 110 outlets and how fast can they charge? Where I do want to stop and walk around is a fishing access or a trailhead where there won't even be a 110 outlet available.

When I do run the interstate it's likely a Missoula to Seattle run across Washington. One quick 15 minute stop in Ritzville is the norm (I actually no longer need that refeul with my new 750 mile range TDI) and maybe a 5 min rest stop outside of Ellensburg and one 5 min in Post Falls. With the rest stops they are right there with a quick exit and close parking, it's easy to get off take a pee and get back on in 5 mins.

What should be the plan would be to own a EV for day to day, then rent a ICE to go to Seattle, swap it out for an EV rental while there, and rent an ICE to get home. I just can't afford that. Not a good EV for everyday, especially a Tesla as it would have to be awd, and I would never go to Seattle if I was that deep into rentals.

PS I just realized this is all in a towing application. Then forget all the above, as pointed out the towing is just not going to work EV

[ldjessee00]

Hersbird,

Time to find? The car does that automatically. It is literally part of the trip you plan on the app/car. I guess I could break out a paper map to plan a trip on a computer that has more computational power than all the devices I have in my house...

And yes, there is additional time to exit and get back on... but I am not cannonballing when I take car trips. There is usually no rush or need to squeeze every second to be on the road. 110 charges like 3 to 5 miles per hour. Not great, for sure. I have not seen a concrete boat ramp not have 110... I have seen gravel boat ramps not have power. Also most parks have RV parking, which has 240 at 50 amp plugs. Charges EVs pretty decently for AC.

Two human beings, with varying bladder capacity, dietary needs, and joint issues means at two to three hours we were wanting to stop anyway. And I remember when I was more... dedicated to trying to cram as much time in the car to see how fast/quick I could get to my destination, so I get that where I am at now is not where everyone is.

I disagree about EVs and towing in concept, but do see how now in practicality it is not going to work for your case. I think that Tesla, and other manufacturers, will learn from these EV and hydrogen semis, and by the time the Tesla Cybertruck (or the Ford F150 EV) comes out, maybe they will have learned how to do it better.

Also, trains are all electric prime movers, so if electric motors were bad at towing, I doubt that would be true. And if manufacturers can produce a battery (or battery and super/ultra capacitor) pack that provides 500+ miles of range for the right price, then distance and towing is more attainable.

I always liked the idea of a trailer with a battery incorporated in it and have seen that mentioned here (ecomodder forums) a few times. Yes, it lowers the amount of towed weight being cargo, but if range and time are most important, then trading range for weight would be the logical choice.

What if trailer brakes were regen braking and charging the trailer's pack? Not sure if that would be worth it for the extra weight for motors and electronics... Again, depends on if your top priority is range and lower downtime... Park the trailer in one recharging spot, park the truck in another.

Anyway, if you are always hauling something heavy (boat, rv?) and always going 500+ miles, then right this minute, there is not an EV that will do exactly that... but I think that within 5 to 10 years, you will be able to find an EV that does that.

Of course, the Touareg TDI's AWD towing capacity is like, 7,700 lbs? And you can get 700 miles towing? I mean, we got great mileage with our VW TDI wagen, but 700 miles? In 2 to 3 years, we will see what the Cybertruck is doing with its real world towing range. On paper, it seems like it should be able to tow anything your Touareg TDI AWD can tow... but the question will be, how far before it needs a recharge?

I would not recommend renting. I know some people say if you do not need it 95+% of the time you might be better off, but I own a Subaru Outback and I am not sure how often I 'need' AWD.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by ldjessee00

I suppose Japan and Europe in general are irrelevant as well?

Could anything I said even taken wildly out of context imply that's what I think of Japan and Europe?

Back to the context in which I responded, Norway has 50% EV sales because they massively penalize other vehicles and subsidize EVs. Drop all of those penalties/subsidies and you think we'd see 50% sales? They aren't better people, they just value liberty less. Perhaps since their largest industry is petroleum, they need to drive expensive EVs to distract us from their "sins".

I have an electric car that does great as a commuter, and is actually a better than another small car I bought in the past to fill the same role.

No doubt. If you were a regular, you'd know I'm a huge fan of EVs and have been planning to get one for local travel.

Batteries are terrible at what metric compared to what?

In comparison to ICE vehicles, a battery is the equivalent of a fuel tank, and they are terrible in nearly every metric compared to a fuel tank. Batteries are like a $10,000 fuel tank that takes ages to fill, has less range, requires environmental conditioning (heating/cooling/vibration reduction), diminishes in capacity over time, is heavy, and takes up a lot of space.

Sales of ICE cars are dropping and EVs sales are increasing. I have not found anything that says EVs were 1% of car sales in the US for 2019. Where did you get this information?

I'm going to need you to show your work. US automotive sales reached 17.3M and BEV sales were around 0.26M, or about 1.5% of sales.

EV sales in the US is down 10% from last year, and global sales are also down about 10%.

https://insideevs.com/news/343998/mo...les-scorecard/

Hahaha, the comment about technology stagnating, now I am not sure if you are just trolling me or not...

Processor speed hasn't increased since 2005, and the pace of transistor shrinking has massively slowed, and is about to halt altogether in the next few years.

The law of diminishing returns means that it takes more and more effort to get less and less benefit.

Sure, we'll continue to see advances in all areas of technology, especially in bio-engineering, but there is no guarantee that batteries can be made much better than they currently are. I'd be happy to be wrong, but the fact that money is being spent to develop technology is not cause to celebrate... and in most areas of technology, the pace of innovation will slow.

To allow for true high speed trains, the rail system has to be upgraded. Like no road/track crossings...Curves have to be more open.. These kind of improvements to the infrastructure as well as train traffic control and trains in general.

Japan and China are building maglev trains. Magnetic Levitation... We could implement these things, but we have not. And yes, it would cost, but would it cost as much as maintaining the national highway system? Would it cost as much as the F-22 or F-35 programs? I bring them up, as they are trillion dollar projects that we, as a nation, paid for. If the US wanted to start a program to upgrade its rail infrastructure to even just highspeed rail standards, we could do so. It might actually help the economy... but we would still be behind and not the leaders.. which right now seem to be Japan and China's maglev trains.

You've already answered why we don't have more extensive train infrastructure and gimmicks like floating trains; cost. Even with our cheap infrastructure it's not profitable for human transport. How would making everything orders of magnitude more expensive result in profitability? Why should the US care to be a world leader in floating trains (granted, it is a neat trick)?

The highway and road infrastructure is needed regardless of how extensive the rail system is, so it doesn't make sense to talk in terms of shifting funds away from road infrastructure and into trains. I'm not taking a train from my house to all the places I travel.

National defense is among the only and greatest purposes of the federal government. Which car you drive is among the lowest. I agree that we probably spend too much on national defense, and what we spend goes towards dumb things like expensive piloted jet fighters, but the choice was never new jets, or floating trains for everyone.

When I was in Korea, the train system was better than it was where I came from... at the time atleast. It is only since then did I come to find out that Indiana actually had several commuter train systems that brought people 30 to 50 miles from the surrounding areas to Indianapolis everyday... But that was before WW2.

South Korea has a population greater than California in the area roughly the size of Indiana, our 38th largest state. Those conditions necessitate expensive transportation infrastructure, and it becomes economically feasible since they don't have as much ground to cover, and a greater number of people use it.

Being envious of mass transit infrastructure due to very high population density seems odd to me, but some people like living elbow to elbow.

I used to think plugin hybrid would be good enough, but once it was pointed out that vehicles are lugging around two different systems to do the same thing, hampering both, I realized they were just not good enough. Pure EVs is the way to go.

I used to believe pure EV was the way to go, then as I gained knowledge came to realize that plug-in hybrids are probably the superior bridge technology. The battery is the most expensive, worst part of an EV. Minimizing the most expensive, worst part of a vehicle makes sense. A hybrid maximizes the strengths of both power plants; the power and efficiency of electric motors, and the energy density and speed of refilling of an ICE.

While I and a few other EV purists may be content with a "pure EV", most other consumers likely aren't. We aren't 5-10 years away from pure EVs dominating the market. My best guess is 15-20.