In Europe vehicle footprint is a big deal and for a box truck, minimizing vehicle footprint (and maximizing capacity) is likely more important than reducing drag. Particularly when you are looking at vehicles which will likely spend most of their time pushing 16+ tons and accelerating and decelerating to speeds around 30 MPH all day long.
> you need serious charging infrastructure if you are going to be charging a Semi every 250 - 300 km.
These trucks aren't designed for long haul/ cross country trips. There won't be charging every 250 km, they will go out, do their job, come home and park on a charger.
Reason conversion to electric happened earlier for golf carts was electric golf carts only have about 4-5kwh worth of batteries. Interestingly historically lead acid batteries are about $100-150 per kwr. Which is close to where automotive grade lion batteries are now.
So no surprise that delivery trucks are converting to electric. They have the exact some scenario going on.
He also owns several electric golf-carts he's tunes up for speed and light 4WD.
Fixed gears and electric motors life spans are between 25,000 and 50,000 hours. Vs less than 10,000 hours for a piston engine.
Everything about cars is designed around that fact that the engine is shot after 200-250,000 miles. Would not surprise me if eventually the expected life of an EV will end up being 2 to 3 times longer.
Technical development might have some impact as well. I remember as a kid many trucks needing bigger engines (e.g. sand or concrete transport) had the cab-behind-engine layout, but nowadays those are more or less completely gone. Maybe turbochargers and intercoolers allowed a sufficiently powerful engine in the cab-above-engine layout?
The entire Nordics allow 25m (83 ft) trucks up to 60 tons.
For a buyer of semis, the cost of running one is arguably the most important factor. Producers need to focus on $ / km and there range is quite important (as well as charging infrastructure)
You might have heard of UPS? FedEx? Amazon? Maybe you've had a contractor work on your home or business?
All of these businesses operate on less than 180 miles round trips per day typically inside the US. In Europe distances tend to be even shorter.
Semis are by nature long haul. It's rare to see semis pulling 40 foot trailers through urban areas even in the US. Semis are usually limited to long haul or short haul freight from industrial or agricultural areas. The Volvo trucks are designed to operate locally and it's a huge market.
> For a buyer of semis, the cost of running one is arguably the most important factor.
There is definitely a market for semis—particularly in the US—but it's a vastly different market than what this targets.
Yes but you are referring to the small urban trucks used in last mile deliveries. The article mentions heavy duty trucks. Even in the last mile delivery case, a limited 300km range is a problem because that means the same truck cannot be shared by workers in following shifts. Or maybe operate autonomously 24/7.
We don't have to guess. If you go to Volvo's site, you can see exactly what sort of trucks they are talking about. We're talking about:
=> "A two-axle truck with a gross vehicle weight up to 16 tonnes and an excellent working environment for the driver. Volvo Trucks can deliver complete vehicles for urban transport like deliveries."
AND
=> "A three-axle truck with a gross vehicle weight up to 27 tonnes and a comfortable working environment for the driver. Volvo Trucks can deliver complete vehicles for demanding types of urban transport like waste collection, light construction transports and deliveries."
https://www.volvotrucks.com/en-en/trucks/alternative-fuels/e...
> Even in the last mile delivery case, a limited 300km range is a problem because that means the same truck cannot be shared by workers in following shifts.
Pretty much all delivery companies have sub 12 hour routes which run during business hours and into the evening. There is very little demand for package delivery at 2am. Likewise, construction is a 9-5 sort of job. Garbage collection (which is specifically mentioned) is almost always a once/ per day route.
I'm sure there is demand for autonomous 24/7 vehicles out there, but there are also plenty of commercial vehicles which are parked over night as well.
> => "A two-axle truck with a gross vehicle weight up to 16 tonnes and an excellent working environment for the driver. Volvo Trucks can deliver complete vehicles for urban transport like deliveries."
This is still significantly heavier than what most courier companies like FedEx and DHL use; within Europe most use Ford Transits and similar, which have a maximum gross weight of 3.5t (this is partly due to licensing; these vehicles can be driven on a normal "car" driving license).
I don't live in Europe, but I'm inclined to take Volvo at face value on this.
Note that within the EU, in general "large goods vehicle" licenses cover everything over 3.5 tonnes, so these Volvo trucks are _well_ into that category. Package delivery companies avoid such large vehicles for last-mile deliveries.
But yes, two-axle trucks like what Volvo is proposing do of course see heavy usage for deliveries in commercial/industrial settings. Most smaller supermarkets are supplied by such trucks, for example, especially within cities (where loading bays are rare).
Again, look at Volvo's site. They understand this market, they've been in it for 50+ years.
Long haul trucking is still out of reach of batteries, it seems.
Europe is much denser when comapared to US. You can do a lot within 300KM in Europe. Volvo openly states that the trucks are "to be used for regional transport and urban construction operations in Europe".
The trucks in question and the possible range is very well suited to this kind of operation.
Also, there's another important factor: Noise. Some European countries are more sensitive to noise than others. The Netherlands and Sweden comes to my mind.
These trucks will be a huge win on that front because a 44 tonne truck is not exactly silent, especially under load.
Volvo has a way to go if they want to compete in this market.
Noise wont have any effect as it is not government regulated. A buyer of Semis wont think twice about noice if $ / km is lower.
There have been many very aerodynamic conventionally contoured gasoline powered cars, including one of my favorites, the Mazda MX-6 Mystere.
I've heard this too, but while Chevy and Nissan went the exotic route, every Tesla so far has been fairly normal looking. There were nice-things on them like the gull-wing doors and the handles on the Model S, but those were contained in a traditional design.
The CyberTruck will obviously break that mold, but I suspect that much of the look of the CyberTruck is to keep costs down and efficiency up. It is extremely difficult to make a traditional pickup truck efficient.
The door handles are not an EV design cue at all. They are only on 2 Teslas and no other EVs. They are meant to look and feel luxurious and futuristic and would not be out-of-place on any higher end car. Like the gull-wing doors, I suspect they were done that way because Musk thought they would look cool.
Or at least that's how the stereotypes go. Fancy styling didn't work for them for the same reason that Hyundai is having a hard time convincing people Genesis is actually a luxury brand. Buying something as a signal doesn't work very well when the signal is conflicting.
I would choose whichever makes sense for my business. Without pricing and reliability numbers, it's impossible to know which that might be.
The closest vehicle in Tesla's garage to this is the Tesla Cybertruck which looks bizarre, but is about $20,000 less than the nearest announced competitor. If Tesla launched a butt ugly Cybervan which was similarly functional and cost effective, you can bet it would be popular with the class of buyer who are shopping for e-Vans.
Right now I'm eyeballing the Cybertruck personally, in spite of it's appearance. Spending $20k to get a more traditional looking truck just doesn't make sense to me. The only concern I have is whether those high truck bed walls will screw things up.
No, Cybertruck is competing with stuff like Ford F150. Volvo FH is a commercial truck. The nearest thing is the Tesla Semi.
Tesla has also hinted at a passenger van eventually... but again no date, no details.
Production starts sometime in 2021 with scale production probably in 2022.
Production of Semi was supposed to start this year. According to Musk it was delayed because Tesla is still starved for batteries (a single semi consumes the same amount of cells as 10-20 Model 3 cars)
Cell bottleneck will be solved with the new battery production system recently demonstrated at battery day.
Tesla hints many things. They need to figure out their supply chain. Commercial fleets require maintenance and spare parts.
Yep. But this is mitigated a bit by the fact that EVs tend to require massively less maintenance and spare parts.
From what I've seen, Tesla does not do service really well and that's something they will have to get down if they are going to get into commercial vehicles. Even if Tesla trucks require vastly less ongoing service, they need to have that service be good. I've heard of Tesla owners having to wait several weeks for parts, for a commercial vehicle that's a no-go.
EVs should have a substantial advantage over trucks in the brake wear department, battery overhaul costs will match or possibly be lower than the engine overhaul costs.
Put it all together and for short haul trips EVs should have an advantage and for the longer haul they are as yet impractical. Keep in mind that a 1000 liter fuel reserve is a substantial amount of energy for relatively little weight disadvantage on a vehicle that already weighs 8 tons, the equivalent in batteries weighs many times more. Some of this weight disadvantage will be compensated by regenerative braking, with a diesel vehicle that energy is converted to waste heat every time the vehicle comes to a stop.
So, overall, I think short haul EV trucks will have the edge soon, long haul it likely will be diesel for quite a while to come.
Tesla has a history of claiming their products will be cheaper than they turn out to be. Pretty big claim to say it's cheaper when, as of now, they haven't produced or sold a single truck. I guess it works though, because every time a competitor puts an EV truck out there, someone inevitably claims that the Cybertruck is cheaper.
If the Cybertruck also ends up 15% more expensive than the original advertised price, it'll still cost dramatically less than any competitor.
They've taken pre-orders and accepted cash, it's a contract. Tesla will sell those trucks for the announced prices.
Even using $38k as the base price of the Model 3[1], it is still a good value compared to competing electric vehicles which tend to have much lower ranges, slower charging networks, and worse performance. The Model Y competitors are also generally more expensive and have lower ranges.
They are still a bit pricy compared to non-EVs, but compared to other EVs, Teslas are not priced at a premium. If you value performance, the gap is even more significant.
> I guess it works though, because every time a competitor puts an EV truck out there, someone inevitably claims that the Cybertruck is cheaper.
It works because as I mention above, Tesla has a track record of delivering decent value. It is extremely fair to say Tesla vehicles are often behind schedule, but their pricing (again compared to other EVs) is usually extremely competitive.
[1] It was possible for quite a while to get a Model 3 for $35k, it was just a little tricky without a pre-order.
Tesla will have at least some commercial trucks. Whether they will compete directly with this or not remains to be seen. I suspect if they do, they will be price competitive for reasons in my post above.
Personally I hate marmite but love the truck!
I had 2 Nissan LEAF from 2013-2018 and was keenly aware that I was enjoying a piece of the future. Part of the experience was simply revolutionary: quietness, no gas station, amazing torque.
At the same time, being an early adopter had a steep cost: limited range, limited charging options outside of home. (As it turned out, that cost turned out to be less steep than perceived, and simple planning made it pretty much a non-issue.)
This is obviously a generalization and there are exceptions but there seems to be a large overlap between those willing to have a radically different product that comes with severe drawbacks, and those who enjoy the quirkyness of it. And yes: the status (even if it's a subconscious thing for most people).
It's worth noting that the 2019 Nissan LEAF was redesigned to look like regular cars, just as its battery doubled in capacity (tripled if you compare from the first models). It signaled that it was no longer cutting edge and ready for mainstream. Anecdotally, tax agencies agreed as most tax incentives were either dropped or severely reduced around that time.
It's part of Scandinavian culture and its aesthetic.
Maybe.
Tesla used to do that - Model S or Model 3 follow that idea. And that was big part of their success - cars, that look like cars (remember all fugly EVs in 2010s?), with few quirks here and there, but nothing out of ordinary. But as a company, they depart from this idea with things like cybertruck, and are focusing more on hype over last few years.
Tesla wasn’t the first with production BEVs, either. Or first with any kind of EV, production or not. Companies built them anyway.
"The Tesla Semi’s drag coefficient of 0.36 is lower than today’s trucks at 0.65 to 0.7, and even lower than the Bugatti Chiron at 0.38, one of the world’s fastest sports cars" [1].
Objects with good drag coefficients are usually good looking, or are not hard to make good looking (while not so true for the other way around).
[1]: https://www.machinedesign.com/mechanical-motion-systems/arti...
Compare it to a normal car instead, and it's the equivalent of an old Chevy Tahoe and far worse than normal saloon cars which are typically at 0.29ish.
That's extremely reductive & vague.
The #1 design consideration for teslas is safety.
What companies like Tesla do is driving the hype for the sake of stock market, which is wrong - the target should be users of vehicles and the purpose they were purposed for.
I would choose the Volvo over any newage design with huge waste of space for transport - they are meant to be a TRANSPORT vehicles not a design for driving to a shopping mall picking chicks (that dont care about transport vehicle anyway).
And Volvo did it right. Targeting purpose, targeting users and business. Congrats. Finally.