Our recently opened Costco has 4 DC fast chargers, with two large end-to-end parking spaces allocated for each charger. Looks like they might have thought about someone pulling a trailer.Didn’t know that. Have to check ours. I still hate going to Costco but now I could drop wife at door and just sit in car at charger to avoid the inside chaos
Can't say I have ever seen an EA station that was not a DCFC, but if I am going to stop at any EA it is for a fast charge, so I am filtering for DCFC.
Thanks. I'm realizing my suggestion for a mix of Level 2 was ignorant bogosity. I was thinking of cost and total utility draw. I just looked it up and a typical Level 2 is 10-20 kW, an order of magnitude less than even a wimpy 150kW DCFC. I need to internalize that Level 2 is just for overnight trickle charging. Maybe Walmart's mix could be fewer 400 kW DCFC further out and more 150 kW DCFC closer in?
Higher speed Level 2 is also great for charging when I go to conferences. For example, when I go to a particular conference, I park across the street for a couple to a few hours every day to pull ~20 kW and get 40-60 kWh (30-50%). By the time the conference is over, I’ve pulled a full charge. It’s great when stopping at a hotel overnight while on a road trip. I also find it helpful when running errands that include a shopping stop. An hour or two on an 80A Level 2 charger is great.
The Terra Harvester will more then liklely have the towing capacity you need.
I'm not a pickup truck guy. It's Traveler Harvester or bust, for me.
They say 320 miles, but that's usually charged at 100%. It not recommended to charge past 80%. So that would take away some of the miles. Also is that 320 miles with 35 in tires?Short answer, yes I reserved a Harvester but may switch to BEV. If they can get the range to a good amount (north of 320miles real world interstate), I'd be in.
I like the "idea" of the harvester, but mechanically it's going to be really complex. I keep my vehicles a long time and want to minimize potential issues. The idea of reduced complexity, maintenance, and repairs is VERY appealing. Tires are already going to be expensive, maybe I can offset some of that with reduced service costs.
Its actually targeted for 350 miles, and it is completely fine to charge to 100% if needed. For example, when starting a road trip that will exceed your range limit, you would want to top off at 100% then hit the road. Charging to 100% is not recommended for daily driving. It also makes more sense to charge to 100% overnight before leaving (and not while out on the road at a DCFC, b/c you will iikely have an optimal charging curve somewhere between 10% - 85%), so it is always best NOT to charge to 100% when making multiple DCFC stops (simply b/c it will usually increase your trip total time, as opposed to making shorter duration stops within the fastest part of the curve).
I know, I own an EV. Charging up to 80% goes pretty fast. About 15-20 minutes. But from 80-100 it takes an additional 45 minutes. It's also not recommended because the batteries become very hot after 80. And if you're charging at home, is using a lot more of your electricity. I knew all that. I was just wondering if the 320 mile range was for 80% or 100. My Ioniq 5 was advertised for 320. But that's at 100%
Just to be clear since there are a bunch of people here that have not owned and EV, those percentages may or may not be the case for all EV's. Every charging curve is different, and even current charging curves can change on existing vehicles with OTA's. We have seen the charging curves get flatter with newer batteries, BMS and 800V architecture, so I would expect to see some incremental improvements between now and launch (potentially). This is a great resource for comparisons, and you can eliminate cars and just look at EV TRUCKS & SUVS:
outofspecstudios.com
Just to be clear since there are a bunch of people here that have not owned and EV, those percentages may or may not be the case for all EV's. Every charging curve is different, and even current charging curves can change on existing vehicles with OTA's. We have seen the charging curves get flatter with newer batteries, BMS and 800V architecture, so I would expect to see some incremental improvements between now and launch (potentially). This is a great resource for comparisons, and you can eliminate cars and just look at EV TRUCKS & SUVS:
Charging test — Out of Spec Studios
Also, I'm not sure where you are coming up with the 320 number? This is what Scout has published on the Scout site, so I would go with 350 miles at 100% as the target number... 320 will hopefully be more around 90%, which is likely where you will be when looking at range before a fast charge on a road trip for example.
From Scout:
Go the distance,
Pure electric models offer up to 350 miles of
I hear you. My plan is to add topper to my Terra and it will look like a suv. How much does your trailer weight loaded?
I’m rewatching the Motor Trend interview to see if anything is said about rechargeing times and came across a factory item. At 21:20 Scott is talking about the BEV and Harvester using the same assembly line and says there’s a JIT operation (Just In Time) for which battery, one for the gas tank, one for the genset. Makes me think they plan to do whatever vehicle by vehicle.
I just hope they don't hold up the EV production launch if the Harvester isn't ready to launch.
Totally agree as that is a worry of mine. I understand SM needs to sell what folks want but hopefully the Rivian influence will keep them focused on the latest and greatest technology for full ev vehicles.
I’m ok if the Harvester’s come out a little later. It just gives me a little more time to put more pennies aside.
Agreed. I am okay to wait until they are confident in the Harvester.
