Harvester Battery Stage of Charge Question

[SpaceEVDriver]

Ooooo! Is that a hint at the end @Jamie@ScoutMotors ?

Anyone who drives deliberately can get better than the EPA rating on any vehicle.
I regularly get 2.5 miles/kWh in the Lightning on the freeway.
The battery is 131 kWh usable.
That’s 328 miles freeway.
I regularly get >3 miles/kWh around town.
That’s > 390 miles range.

The EPA rating is 320 miles for my truck.

 

[J Alynn]

Ram is bringing back the TRX. That’s what Ram is good at (and making a mockery of a Diesel Power Wagon that really isn’t a Power Wagon).

But to be fair, Scout hasn’t brought their product to market yet either. Right now Ram & Scout are in a tie when it comes to their EV lineup.

Fair point

 

[RodorW]

RAM could be good at EVs (though the Jeep and Dodge point otherwise) they won’t know for a while because they’re too afraid to try, but they built a base around V8s and for a lot of those people it’s hard to try something new or in many cases give up the sound

 

[6-ScoutFamily]

Anyone who drives deliberately can get better than the EPA rating on any vehicle.
I regularly get 2.5 miles/kWh in the Lightning on the freeway.
The battery is 131 kWh usable.
That’s 328 miles freeway.
I regularly get >3 miles/kWh around town.
That’s > 390 miles range.

The EPA rating is 320 miles for my truck.

You make me swoon with hope.

 

[R1TVT]

I once drove for an entire day without charging my R1T...
Of course, I was going much slower than normal due to a solar eclipse that was creating chaos in the north woods.
I was hitting 4 mi/kWh easy!
LOL

 

[04Ram2500Hemi]

RAM could be good at EVs (though the Jeep and Dodge point otherwise) they won’t know for a while because they’re too afraid to try, but they built a base around V8s and for a lot of those people it’s hard to try something new or in many cases give up the sound

The Ram REV with the Pentastar has potential. But I agree, most truck owners want to hear a V8. The 5.7L Hemi is damn near bullet proof (I had two of them), and in the REV it could be a great combo.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

You make me swoon with hope.

I live at 7000 ft elevation so even discounting the downhill (because I have to come back up, and it's more expensive to climb than you gain going down), that's a 20% decrease to air density and wind resistance compared with sea level, which makes a huge difference. I run with my tires at near max pressure, which reduces rolling resistance but increases harshness. I consider our 75 mph speed limit to be a maximum, not a minimum. I have a wide temperature tolerance (I've lived in the hot desert and the cold desert), so rarely see the need for HVAC use. I grew out of the need for hard acceleration about 20 years ago. And I rarely rush.

 

[BeerParty]

And I guess another question ( sorry if it has been discussed previously) Why is Scout using a 4 cylinder for this set up? The new Ram truck thing has a V6 for its REV and gets 690 miles of range. With I think a 26 gallon tank. For a bigger off roading SUV and truck isn't a 4 cylinder a little small? Especially since there won't be any turbos or superchargers?? I would assume Ram decided on the V6 to make sure the engine (generator) has enough grunt juice to power the battery pack? I am interested to see Scouts thought process behind it all.

Remember that the amount of power a EREV truck has bears no relation to how powerful the gasoline engine is. The gasoline engine is just part of the electrical generator set (motor and alternator, aka genset), the truck's power comes from it's battery and electric motors. There are several reasons why Scout would select a 4-cylinder engine over Ram's 6-cylinder. I believe the main three are:

• The Scout's genset is in the rear of the vehicle. The Ram's genset is in the front, it will have a traditional engine placement. So the space and shape available is different.
  • This also means the Scout will retain it's frunk for the EREV variant. The Ram will not have a frunk.
• The Scout is off-road focused, the Ram is towing focused. So the genset power requirements are totally different.
• Both vendors are using engines they already have access to.
  • Scout mentioned that the engine will be a naturally aspirated 4-cylider engine from VW.
  • Ram is using their existing 3.6L Pentastar V6 engine.

There are other considerations as well, but you get the idea.

 

[TelemarkingSailor]

It was several years ago when I read Station 11 (book is more fun to read than the HBO series IMO) and learned that gasoline eventually... "dies" / "goes stale". While I do want the harvester for days when I go skiing in the mountains or down to Oregon or California for wine tasting, I don't know how many days there are when I travel 150+ miles. +1 on the idea that the software would be able to alert you to when you might have a 'stale gas' problem.

 

[cyure]

It was several years ago when I read Station 11 (book is more fun to read than the HBO series IMO) and learned that gasoline eventually... "dies" / "goes stale". While I do want the harvester for days when I go skiing in the mountains or down to Oregon or California for wine tasting, I don't know how many days there are when I travel 150+ miles. +1 on the idea that the software would be able to alert you to when you might have a 'stale gas' problem.

The Wrangler 4xe did that. If a Wrangler can do that I have no doubt that a Scout can.

 

[speedrye]

I live at 7000 ft elevation so even discounting the downhill (because I have to come back up, and it's more expensive to climb than you gain going down), that's a 20% decrease to air density and wind resistance compared with sea level, which makes a huge difference. I run with my tires at near max pressure, which reduces rolling resistance but increases harshness. I consider our 75 mph speed limit to be a maximum, not a minimum. I have a wide temperature tolerance (I've lived in the hot desert and the cold desert), so rarely see the need for HVAC use. I grew out of the need for hard acceleration about 20 years ago. And I rarely rush.

Makes me wonder what kind of efficiency hit the Harvester engines will have at higher elevations... Without varying RPM and speed, they'll hopefully be able to optimize it a bit more than a normal ICE, but 5% less oxygen to burn trumps all.

 

[RodorW]

The Wrangler 4xe did that. If a Wrangler can do that I have no doubt that a Scout can.

Just hopefully without the park outside warnings.. I’m not directing this at just Jeep as many hybrids have had scary issues, even Gen1 BEV Bolts had the warning. Genuinely hope no car suffers “park outside” or that car buyers half to deal with such a concern warning

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

It was several years ago when I read Station 11 (book is more fun to read than the HBO series IMO) and learned that gasoline eventually... "dies" / "goes stale". While I do want the harvester for days when I go skiing in the mountains or down to Oregon or California for wine tasting, I don't know how many days there are when I travel 150+ miles. +1 on the idea that the software would be able to alert you to when you might have a 'stale gas' problem.

Generally without a stabilizer, gasoline shouldn’t be used after it’s been exposed to the atmosphere for more than 1-6 months, depending on the amount of ethanol in it. Sitting in a pressure-sealed gas tank counts as having been exposed. For most fuels, it’ll be bad within 3-6 months. In other words, a driver should be using up most of the tank within 3 to six months and mixing in fresh fuel.

Yes, everyone will have an anecdote of how they stored their car for a year with a full tank and it suffered no ill effects. The vehicle manufacturer isn’t going to care about those anecdotes. For reliability and liability reasons, they’re likely going to have some kind of regular maintenance cycle that runs the engine for enough time to push the oldest fuel (in the fuel lines) through and burns it and creates an approximate 3-6 month usage cycle.

 

[speedrye]

Generally without a stabilizer, gasoline shouldn’t be used after it’s been exposed to the atmosphere for more than 1-6 months, depending on the amount of ethanol in it. Sitting in a pressure-sealed gas tank counts as having been exposed. For most fuels, it’ll be bad within 3-6 months. In other words, a driver should be using up most of the tank within 3 to six months and mixing in fresh fuel.

Yes, everyone will have an anecdote of how they stored their car for a year with a full tank and it suffered no ill effects. The vehicle manufacturer isn’t going to care about those anecdotes. For reliability and liability reasons, they’re likely going to have some kind of regular maintenance cycle that runs the engine for enough time to push the oldest fuel (in the fuel lines) through and burns it and creates an approximate 3-6 month usage cycle.

I've found that non-ethanol gas, with Sta-Bil added to it, has an 18-24 month lifespan. With ethanol gas, it's only 6-9 months with Sta-Bil, so I can't imagine a vehicle even allowing that 6-month span. It'll be interesting to see how Scout handles this.

 

[J Alynn]

Makes me wonder what kind of efficiency hit the Harvester engines will have at higher elevations... Without varying RPM and speed, they'll hopefully be able to optimize it a bit more than a normal ICE, but 5% less oxygen to burn trumps all.

Will be really interesting to see those road tests

 

[LastDayScout]

RAM could be good at EVs (though the Jeep and Dodge point otherwise) they won’t know for a while because they’re too afraid to try, but they built a base around V8s and for a lot of those people it’s hard to try something new or in many cases give up the sound

As a Mopar fan, I feel somewhat qualified to make the following insult. Many Dodge and Ram "enthusiasts" can't spell EV.

 

[J Alynn]

As a Mopar fan, I feel somewhat qualified to make the following insult. Many Dodge and Ram "enthusiasts" can't spell EV.

Is that with a silent ‘g’

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Makes me wonder what kind of efficiency hit the Harvester engines will have at higher elevations... Without varying RPM and speed, they'll hopefully be able to optimize it a bit more than a normal ICE, but 5% less oxygen to burn trumps all.

It’s hard to say without knowing more details about the fuel and ignition management systems they’ll employ. My guess is at least a 5% decrease in power and efficiency for the Harvester at 5000 ft elevation, but up to 20%. It’s too wide of a range to be useful without more knowledge.

 

[Mousehunter]

While I can appreciate the Dodge will be able to handle more of my towing than the Scout - pretty sure I would avoid ever getting another vehicle with a Pentastar. We replace our Pentastar Jeep with a diesel one. Diesel performed so much nicer (the Pentastar would not have enough power to do the towing I want if connected strait to the axles) - but the real kicker, sold the Pentastar to my brother-in-law. Right after warranty was up, the overhead valves gave up the ghost. I think it was a $6k repair.

 

[CRobin]

It’s hard to say without knowing more details about the fuel and ignition management systems they’ll employ. My guess is at least a 5% decrease in power and efficiency for the Harvester at 5000 ft elevation, but up to 20%. It’s too wide of a range to be useful without more knowledge.

This makes me wonder if all you guys think the Traveler will be better MPG or if the Terra will? Excluding how a person drives it. Lead foot or Grandpa every day.