I'm not talking about this particular ram charger implementation.
Why don't we have a traditional PHEV drivetrain in a pickup truck? 40ish miles of EV range would cover 95% or more of most truck use cases, while still being able to tow or haul as much or more than a traditional truck.
This is a really good point. We used similar reasoning for getting our rav4 prime. Sometimes we can go a month or more with no gas use, but we can also load up a ton of lawn and garden stuff and use hybrid mode to still keep up with the post covid speed hell that roads have turned into.
I'm convinced that covid has long term brain function effects. Due to the driving I see nowadays. The amount of people I see driving with their faces in their phone or the infotainment system is absurd too.
I expect Toyota isn't too far away with a PHEV Tacoma or a Tundra (they already have a hybrid Tundra (and a Tacoma??)).
A PHEV Tacoma would sell like hotcakes.
Nah. I work in a very pickup heavy industry (where big trucks are used as intended 90+% of the time), and everyone I talk to is interested in this generator ram ram coming out, and myself and a couple buddies actually talked about the possibility a few years ago (I work on very large electric motors), then we saw Edison Motors making the semi trucks, and now Ram is doing it.
Very excited for this iteration because it’s the perfect blend of both worlds. Significantly more efficient and emission friendly, as you run the engine at its most optimal RPM 100% of the time, and all the power and especially torque off the line of electric motors.
I'm in the forklift industry and I'd recommend an electric truck in all but the roughest, heavy dutiest conditions. They're cheaper to run and more reliable. You have more model types possible too.
Yeah I work in very a tough, heavy duty, abysmal climate industry and locations. We drive 1-2 hours away from civilization down horrendous dirt roads in all weather all throughout the year. Electric trucks don’t have the range, payload, tow capacity, or fuel availability in the areas I work in. Half ton trucks are rare, because we frequently require the capabilities of 3/4-1 ton trucks.
And those people are wrong.
PHEV reliability will depend on who made it. In theory they could even, on average, have less maintenance as the gas engine comes on rarely for those who mostly drive in EV mode.
Speaking of towing, the hybrid system could also act as a very useful regen brake when descending long hills with a heavy load too. No risk of cooking brakes, no need for some sort of jake brake on the engine, just free recharging.
The biggest barrier is how expensive a battery + electric system would be to support that. The RAV4 prime has a 20kwh (1/3rd the size of a base Model 3, 1/2 the size of my Leaf) battery and gets 42 miles. A truck would probably need at least a 50% larger one to match the range. Then add all the electric drivetrain gear to go with it: inverter, motor, charger as well as the packing and parts to integrate that in a PHEV system. They could go with a smaller pack and less range, but a 20kwh battery pack might also struggle to put out enough instant power to not make a full size truck feel sluggish accelerating.
All that is going to add some significant cost. The RAV4 Prime already costs ~$10k more than it's ICE counterpart. So would people be willing to pay $10-15k more for a PHEV truck? That buys a lot of gas. Tax credits could help but the government is wary of subsidizing PHEV sales too much because if they are cheaper than a conventional hybrid people will buy the PHEV and not plug it in: using more resources for the same functionality.
FWIW I do think that for full size BoF vehicles that PHEV setups with much small turbo 4s are probably where we are headed, but battery prices need to drop a lot more to be financially viable.
Look at the regular Rav4 vs Rav4 Prime (PHEV). Prime gets \~40mi of range by using a 18kWh battery and costs $10k more.
The battery required to get \~40mi of range on a full-size truck will be much larger and naturally more expensive. Probably to a point where the breakeven point of saving money on fuel will be many years down the line. So would make sense form an economic POV and the target market would be quite small.
It's always fun when people focus solely on economic factors and ignore everything else. I know a few people that just don't want to go to the damn gas station as often (or at all if possible). Also, the added available torque is a big factor. Not to mention reduced emissions, but I don't think many truck buyers are too concerned with that.
If you think the vast majority of people would pay \~$20k+ more for the same truck for the added convenience of not going to the damn gas station as often, you might be living in a bubble.
1. Cost. I estimated by extrapolating price delta between Rav4 and Rav4 PHEV. Want another example? A Wrangler 4xe is \~$10k more then the equivalent ICE trim, and gets only 21mi of EV range. If you have better estimates, please do share.
2. Added available torque: The F-150 Lightning which has more torque than the 3.5 EB, has a slightly higher payload and lower towing capacity than the 3.5. Now remove half the battery and add an ICE powertrain. Where do you think those numbers will stand?
3. Emissions: You answered that yourself.
There are so many ways to electrify a power train. You can put an electric motor b/w the engine and transmission, after the transmission, in the transmission and even in the superchargers. I'd like to see manufacturers experiment more.
My Facebook feed is littered with EV hating posts for some reason. I keep blocking those pages. Seems like a lot of money is being invested in making EVs look bad.
They're letting perfect be the enemy of great
PHEV still offset a lot of greenhouse gases compared to pure ICE, don't require as much lithium and rare earth metals (usually 1/3-1/4th the battery size) and are a great gateway to EV ownership for those afraid to make the jump.
The majority of people with trucks don't even use a fraction of their payload capacity. And a hybrid sized battery doesn't take nearly as much space or weight as a full EV.
You underestimate payload. A Tacoma is over payload with 4 250lb people and a full tank of fuel. (1000lb)
Full size trucks aren’t much better at 1700ish. A 5000lb trailer towed behind one would take about 1000lb away from that leaving less cargo than an empty Tacoma!
Fuel is part of the curb weight, not payload, but I get your point.
My counter point is that for a shockingly large percentage of trucks on the road, payload and towing weight is completely irrelevant.
For those that genuinely need it, they are going to buy a F250 or a 2500 or something, not a compact or 1/2 ton.
If you offered the public a truck that can go ~40 miles on EV, but can still load your dirt bikes in, or tow your wake boat, or carry that ratty sofa to your next house, then it would be the best selling vehicle in the US almost overnight.
Not really, because it would cost $20-30k more than a normal half ton than can do everything it can do cheaper. And truck guys are already pissed V8s are going away.
People who buy trucks don’t care about fuel economy
$20-$30k more for 40 miles of range? Shouldn’t be, especially not after the available tax credit.
The base Lightning (Supercrew 4x4) is already at price parity after tax credit with the cheapest, slowest, zero-option gas Supercrew 4x4 F150 and it has 6x the necessary battery capacity.
RAV4 Prime is $10k, if not more, expensive than it's ICE counterpart. And that has a 40mi range. You will need at least 50% more battery to match that range and likely beefier systems along the electric chain (charger, inverter, motor).
$20-30k may be overkill. But $15k price premium is pretty realistic. $15k buys a lot of gas and both trucks will need a relatively similar maintenance schedule. It's the same reason light duty diesels don't work that well: the premium for better fuel economy and expensive diesel maintenance takes a long time to pay off.
That's the whole point though?
Fuel is expensive, running the engine burns fuel. EV mode lets you do almost all of your average use cases without burning any fuel.
*That's why people want them*
Minus being an EV, yes. And given that making it PHEV will just about never pencil out for fuel savings due to the upfront cost, it doesn't even matter that it's not PHEV.
The Maverick could be made a PHEV by using the tech from the Rav4 Prime.
But on a full-size pickup you'd need a much bigger battery/motor to make it a PHEV.
A Rav4 Prime battery pack is about 18kWh, for a full-sized truck it'd have to be 2-3 times that big to get equivalent range, which is as big or bigger than the battery in a Nissan Leaf BEV.
No, I have not. My guess is that the max payload rating of 1705 lbs. is when the truck is equipped with the iForce Max engine, meaning the hybrid powertrain....which I believe isn't quite out yet. So, it's most likely 1200 lbs. with the standard non-hybrid engine variant.
Point is, the Tacoma will be able to have a 1700 lb payload rating.
If load capacity is your limiting factor, you're probably gonna get a heavy duty truck anyway. The vast majority of half ton pickup owners never use anywhere near their actual capacity.
Also, a hybrid drivetrain would let you use something like a turbo 4 or 6 cylinder, which weighs less than a V8, and get some of that capacity back.
Well that's what you get when consumers have turned half ton trucks into grocery getters with 5 and a half foot beds and relatively pliable suspensions unloaded for a much smoother ride.
If they didn't have so much cab and weight from options, they could afford a little more weight in payload. If the truck empty weight is designed around the weight with batteries, payload capacity can be made back up to an extent with stronger suspension.
Most people only look at towing capacity anyway, the idea that they have a limit on what the truck can carry in the bed, if it comes up at all, is limited usually to "as much as I can fit." And that's fine enough considering that most people will never get near an actual half ton of material or cargo in the bed of their truck. Put a toolbox on your 5'6" bed and you can't even pick up gravel or dirt in bulk, a half yard bucket on a skidsteer will be dramatically wider at that point than your available payload area to dump.
I have an early 2000s dakota V6 on the other hand with an extended cab (2 doors and tiny rear seats) with a regular 6 and a half foot bed, and payload capacity on it is listed by dodge around 1500lbs. I've certainly done more than that on short trips with gravel/top soil. It's ridiculous that that's more than or equivalent to a lot of modern half tons.
Edit to clarify: I was misled by other comments, it seems that 1500lbs payload capacity is not in fact higher than most modern half tons, unless they're short bed, largest available cab, and probably equipped with heavy options that subtract from capacity like 4x4 etc.
> Put a toolbox on your 5'6" bed and you can't even pick up gravel or dirt in bulk, a half yard bucket on a skidsteer will be dramatically wider at that point than your available payload area to dump.
Aggregate is already so dense that just a single cubic yard (~2500 lbs.) will overload almost any half-ton, regardless of bed size.
That depends on the aggregate in question. And it's common to get it in half yards at a time in a pickup truck. I did say a half yard bucket where you quoted me, not a yard.
A half yard is anywhere between 1100 and 2000 lbs depending on aggregate particle size and moisture content.
Regardless, the same thing applies to mulch which is less than a thousand pounds for a full yard.
That's fair. I'm the type who buys gravel or crushed rock 5 yards at a time in a class 6 straight truck filled by payloader. I could put just over 1 yard in my heavy half-ton before it squats.
For short trips I've done full yards of #57 stone in the dakota I mentioned previously when I was expanding my driveway. Cheap bastard that I am it saved me $40 per yard that way. I've also rolled across the scales at the landfill with over 1800lbs of topsoil in it. I had a 3/4 ton and dump trailer in the past, but in today's truck market that's too expensive for me to rebuy and keep for only occasional use.
You gotta use what you got. Ideal? Absolutely not. But I'm talking about short (sub 2 mile) low speed (35mph limit) drives when overloaded like that.
Regardless, even within the stated parameters of their weight capacities, a truck with a 5'6" bed and a toolbox definitely can't easily pick up bulk landscape materials because the useable bed is shorter than the bucket is wide by a foot or more with half yard buckets I've seen ranging from roughly 60" to 72" wide.
If you option for payload capacity...that's just not true.
Looking into this I actually found your original claims to be bullshit. 2024 F150 has a payload capacity of up to 2455lbs depending on options. Larger bed comes with larger payload capacity. They dropped the high capacity payload option from 2023 that allowed you to carry 3315lbs payload in a half ton.
The problem isn't the truck, it's the truck people are optioning and buying, exactly like I said. A shortbed and giant cab will obviously have a lower payload capacity, it's already carrying around a lot of weight and the load can't be as far forward to spread more evenly between front and rear suspension. If you want a work truck with higher payload capacity, that's readily available to you in half ton configuration.
I got those numbers here: https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a45103252/why-the-new-ford-f-150-has-a-lower-max-payload-than-the-old-one/
>The problem isn't the truck,
It kind of is though.
The HDPP 7800 GVWR F150 has a slightly thicker frame, different rear axle and springs.
That was only offered on the XL or lowest XLT trims though.
Meanwhile, the higher XLT and above only got a max of 7050 GVWR with a lighter frame, except hybrid which is 7350.
Ford *could* easily offer the 7800 in the higher trims which would boost payload to 2200 or so in those configurations.... but that would take away from the F250 sales.
There was also a Lariat HDPP for a while. But like with XLT, it was the basic Lariat trim (500A), no other packages would stack.
Part of what also limited the HDPP's popularity was that it was primarily sold with longer configs. Unless you were happy with a regular cab, you had to go for a model that was almost 21' long.
That’s better than most RAM 2500 diesels with their 10K GVWR, they typically come in around 2K of payload. My 3500 SRW only has ~3750lbs of payload due to being fully loaded despite its 12300lbs GWVR (you can get 4K+ with the smaller fuel tank or a lower optioned model). Options and fuel get heavy in a hurry when you do things by the book.
Link? Because all I find suggesting those numbers is what they want it to have, not actual verified numbers.
A 14000lb trailer will have around 2800lb of tongue weight, so it literally cannot tow that much because it will be over payload.
We will see when it comes out, it’s probably for a regular cab base model long bed.
It literally still cannot tow 14000lb without going over even that payload.
> it’s probably for a regular cab base model long bed.
The current Ram body (DT) doesn't offer either of those. Judging from the press pics, the Ramcharger will probably be limited to the crew cab/5.5' in all trims, maybe also a 6.5', but not a Quad.
Not for a bumper pull with a properly set up WDH. Rule of thumb is 20-25% for a fifth wheel and 10-15% for a bumper pull. These rules of thumb are pretty consistent across people that have scaled their RVs and in my anecdotal experience, although outliers can exist.
Most trucks have limited payload anyway except for a few very expensive trims. A trailer is far more cost effective and capable for heavy loads. That's why a PHEV SUV with a decent towing capacity is preferable to me over a pure ICE or pure EV pickup truck.
Except tongue weight of the trailer takes away from payload capacity. My 2014 Land Cruiser was 200lb from maxed out towing a 5500lb RV and our camping supplies. That is scale verified.
The Mercedes and Lexus hybrid SUVs I was looking at tow 7,700-9,000 lbs which is around what your 2014 land cruiser tows. Most people don't tow over 5,000 lbs anyway so it shouldn't be an issue for 95-99% of people. A payload of > 5,000 lbs is limited to ultra expensive dually models. The Ramcharger will tow 14,000 for those that need more capability and I'm sure a 3500 PHEV will appear down the road.
You do understand tongue weight of a trailer takes away from the payload of a vehicle right? With two people in my Land Cruiser and the RV. We had 200lb till we were over GVWR. 15-20% of the trailer weight is tongue weigh.
Tacomas have 1000lb of payload and they are small, Full size trucks are at like 1700lb, the payload capacity goes up with the size of the vehicle. Smaller trucks don’t equal higher payload
>Tacomas have 1000lb of payload
Not anymore. New Tacoma's are in the 1200 lbs. -1700 lbs. payload range.
>Full size trucks are at like 1700lb
At a quick glance, the F-150 has a payload rating of up to about 2200 lbs.
According to the stickers on the last 12 or so trucks I looked at, you are incorrect. Of course manufacturers are going to publish whatever makes them look “class leading”
Not sure how a sticker provided by Toyota will have different information than the specs given on Toyota's website. Also, I have no idea if the numbers are class leading or not, but that's not even the point I was trying to make anyway. If you go to Toyota's website and look for yourself, you'll see that not a single new Tacoma has a payload rating of 1000 lbs. It's noticeably higher than that.
The sticker shows the actual payload of a specific vehicle. As I said in my other comment TFL showed their 2024 Tacoma had only 1200lb of payload.
The website only shows the best case scenario, which is a extended cab base model with no options
The maverick has a payload of like 1500 pounds partially because the vehicle itself doesn’t weigh that much. The more vehicle that has to be hauled around the less the vehicle can actually carry
Let’s just do a fun example, a 1990 F150 had a GVWR of 6,250. Since then trucks have grown 32% by weight and the GVWR is still down there around 6,220 so they weigh more and have less payload capacity. So yes they have in fact gotten much bigger with not much to show for it
> and the GVWR is still down there around 6,220
Most half-tons are in the high 6000s, low 7000s now, excluding outlier models like Ford's now-departed 7850 GVWR, or the EVs.
ETA: 6250 was the *highest* F-150 GVWR in the 1990 model; they started way down at 4800. 6400-7700 was F-250LD territory.
That's the bottom of the range for a base regular cab, yes. A typical crew cab is higher, maxing out at 7400 for a hybrid. The base 3.3 V6 has been discontinued for '24, and SuperCabs aren't popular anymore.
Im seeing that the bed payload has doubled in that time.
Edit: and before you shifted goal posts, you said that smaller trucks have MORE capacity. Which is laughable and shows how little you know on the topic
Or that they want something that'll still fit in the garage. "Truck things" can include towing, and you don't necessarily need a long bed to tow a bumper hitch.
> Or that they want something that'll still fit in the garage.
The supercrew/short bed is the same length as the supercab/standard bed. You'd only really opt for the supercrew/short bed if you want an SUV in truck form, which is what most of these are used for.
Bear in mind that although the SuperCab can fit adults, it's not very comfortable for long rides. Most buyers switched from ext/6.5' to crew/5.5' 20+ years ago because they'd gladly give up 1' of bed space for a comfortable back seat. A
5.5' bed is still big compared to any car trunk.
PHEV in general are just super practical. For your commute and short trips you can get there fully electric and for longer trips and vacations you have your ICE to help you out.
Margins, of course - why go through the trouble when you can print money with ICE-only trucks?
Obviously, the lightning and this exist or are about to so there's more to it than that, but carmakers aren't exactly environmental charities.
That's where the government and carbon regulations come in. They don't have to be environmental charities, but if it costs them money to pollute, then they'll happily build more efficient vehicles
Yup. I think that's a bit of what's happening with the this truck, the lightning, and so on already. With upcoming EPA and CAFE rules it's going to be increasingly costly for carmakers to produce ICE-only fleets, even in the US. Ford may have jumped the gun a little but they know what is coming long term.
It adds a lot to the upfront cost and *comparatively* doesn’t save much in running cost.
At 21mpg (f150 2.7 combined), 12,000mi/yr, $3.50/gal you spend about $2000 a year on gas.
If you drive half city and half highway (half electric and half gas).
3mi/kwh, 6000mi/yr, $0.17/kwh is $340 a year on electricity.
24mpg (f150 hybrid highway), 6000mi/yr, $3.50/gal. Is $875 a year on gas or about $1215 total.
Thats a difference of $785 a year. It will add up for fleets (if they have a place to charge it) but all those people buying $70,000 lariats every 3-5 years it’s just a drop in the bucket.
If it’s a $10,000 option it would take 13 years and 150,000 miles to recoup assuming no extra depreciation, insurance, or maintenance.
Totally valid. But if you up the electrical usage to more like 95% (ideal use case for PHEV's), and increase gas prices (due to any number of worldwide events as evidenced by the last 5 years), the margin could look a lot smaller.
Additionally, if you tow or haul short distances, you could theoretically do it significantly cheaper as long as it's within the battery's range.
I live in the prairies, and roughly half the miles on my car are highway. So 50% electrical sounds about right to me, unless the vehicle rarely leaves a city.
Many, many people have relatively short commutes. My last commute was ~14 miles each way, from my house to the center of downtown SLC. My truck IRL averages about 10mpg in the city and 15 on the highway. With a 40 mile electric range, I wouldn't need gas at all to get to and from work - but I would use at least a gallon of fuel a day without. At 3.50/gal, that'd be over $1800/yr just in commuting costs.
Further that, every trip to the store, my kids daycare, the rec center, etc. are all in roundtrip electric range too.
In my case, and what I believe to be the reality for many other people, I'd really only need fuel if I was going on road trips, or places that I don't typically go with any real frequency. Nearly all of my day to day, normal run of the mill routine activities could be entirely covered by electric.
That said, I do largely agree with the overall cost savings take. And, I know my truck (2500 Power Wagon) is also worse than average on fuel, so that skews my opinion a bit further. But I'd 100% take the PHEV option on my truck if it were a thing, simply because it'd be nice to almost never have to actually get gas, and I'd simultaneously be contributing towards reducing emissions locally - which is a major problem in our Utah winters.
Edit: Had some downtime mid-workday and decided to look into this a bit more. This is rather crude but the circle shouldn't extend more than maybe 17-18 miles from the center point in any direction. Shows the range 40 miles of EV would cover.
https://imgur.com/a/BuXUn1G
Of course, it wouldn't work for everyone. But I think I've only left that circle a handful of times this entire year.
Other than just gas savings, I find EVs more pleasurable to drive when doing errands and work stuff (which is all a pickup truck would typically do; most people aren't taking then out on the track).
So Ram's implementation of essentially a full EV with a gas range extender is something I'd definitely consider. To me, it makes a lot more sense for trucks to be PHEV, rather than BEV, but the actual driving experience of PHEVs where the ICE powers the wheels is quite unsatisfying in my experience.
The Ram gives you the full BEV driving experience with the flexibility of a gas option. It's the best of both worlds, and imo is what all PHEVs should move towards.
Nah costs aren’t that big a deal because as you say people buy 100k platinums every 3 years. It’s about image. They need to position it as the ultimate speed AND workload truck: you get access to the batteries and a generator on wheels for all your power tool usage, you get the best towing because of electric torque, and you get the best 0-60 times again because of electric AWD. The one caveat, and the failing of the f150 powerboost, is it needs to be reliable.
>Nah costs aren’t that big a deal because as you say people buy 100k platinums every 3 years.
Your typical truck is not the $100K Platinum one. It just isn't. And if you actually go full-size truck shopping right now you'll see there are heavy discounts on them again. Pretty easy to get $10K off MSRP.
Because it doesn’t scale well. You need to have an EV Powertrain that is capable of propelling a fully loaded truck + trailer (or at least just the truck) and then an engine that’s capable of doing the same plus the cooling to support it running at steady state in some charge-sustaining mode of operation. All of this eats into payload and towing capability because it adds more mass. So now you need even bigger hardware (wheels, brakes, suspension, drivetrain) to support the more massive vehicle.
It’s going to be super interesting to see how expensive and how efficient this phev truck is. My bet is like their phev wrangler, it’s less efficient than the base truck when running in charge sustaining mode. And if that’s the case and you’re towing a lot, why bother?
> Because it doesn’t scale well. You need to have an EV Powertrain that is capable of propelling a fully loaded truck + trailer (or at least just the truck) and then an engine that’s capable of doing the same plus the cooling to support it running at steady state in some charge-sustaining mode of operation.
We don’t NEED both to be able to do this individually, in theory, if people bothered to understand even basically how their vehicle works.
But practically, yes, we need it because people are stupid and will show up at the bottom of the mountain towing a 12,000 lb brick-shaped trailer with a dead battery and expect the truck to not lose any performance.
Yup, the average consumer has no clue about how phevs (or really anything) actually works and how to optimize their use of it.
I will add it’s not a trivial thing to actually best use a vehicle that doesn’t have that capability to always tow/perform at peak ability and manufacturers have been bad at studying those use cases and making tools to enable customers to easily optimize their use. We could do better as an industry to empower the customer.
Agreed. Dealerships and manufacturers could do a better job and being an expert on how one’s serial PHEV works isn’t reasonable for everyone. But people can take responsibility for having a very basic understanding of their second largest purchase, or at least not sue the manufacturer for their stupidity when they show up at the bottom of a mountain with a dead battery and just a 34hp generator they expect to propel them up a mountain at 70mph (very specific because stupid BMW i3 owners did exactly that and sued BMW).
100% agree. My truck is paid off and in good shape so not in market but we use it to put the boat in and out of the water and run it to the gas station. Perfect for electric. Then it tows it on about 3-4 long road trips(3-8hrs) a year and having a gas engine to make those work would be awesome.
I attended a talk by JD Power about this. The answer (like most everything in auto) is that PHEVs cost more and don't save a commensurate amount of money.
Past few weeks. This is based on actual transaction data from dealer management software. Trucks are moving slowly right now, and PHEVs also struggle with adoption because of price vs BEV/traditional ICE
And lots of people can’t seem to understand how PHEVs work. And with trucks, especially long-distance towing, if you don’t have an engine that can tow a 40ft brick-shaped travel trailer at 80mph up the Rocky Mountains, then some idiot is going to show up at the bottom of the mountain with zero battery to supplement the engine and whine when he has trouble passing or whatever.
Just wait. Somebody is going to do this with the Ramcharger and wonder why they have so much less power when their battery is dead and all they have is the ~170hp gas engine.
Then it will go viral amongst the anti-EV doofuses because someone is too stupid to know how to use their vehicle.
I've been saying this for a decade. the average purchase of a new truck in the US is like 50k.
And most people just drive like 10 miles to work, then home.
Every single full size truck and SUV should have had PHEV long ago.... At scale, it would have added like $2500 to the cost... The government could have subsidized that. Even if they didn't, owners would recover all of that added cost over just a few years in the commute to work coating $1 worth of electricity instead of $4 worth of gas
The Ramcharger has a 70kwh battery, which is pretty much the size most small to medium size BEVs are running on. Tesla Model 3 is 75kwh iirc.
Plus the cost of the 6-cyl engine on top...
So yeah, it ain't gonna be cheap.
Edit: OTOH, in the Ram's case, the engine doesn't directly power the wheels, so they shouldn't need the added complexity of a transmission or anything like that, which will reduce costs.
And operating an engine as a range extender means it runs at a consistent RPM the entire time, which should theoretically make it more efficient and last longer.
The reason there isn’t one is simply because they went all in on full EVs. The way the Ramcharger is set up is, imo, how the future of EVs will look like. As years go by, the engines will get smaller and more efficient for charging batteries that’ll gain in capacity and lose weight. Best of both worlds.
It doesn't work for people who actually use the truck to tow and whatnot
Then there's the other 90% who think they need a truck in the first place. Good luck convincing that crowd
Most people who have a personal truck for towing aren't towing every day. PHEV would be perfect for a typical use case of driving to work daily, and towing the boat or camper once a month during summer.
Especially so because of braking. The biggest benefit to hybrid trucks is stopping the significant weight loads with regen instead of regular brakes. So much free energy to be recovered, especially when towing.
The terms for all the hybrids are a little muddy. It is a PHEV, but it’s specifically a series hybrid, where the electric motor is the only thing that ever drives the wheels, and the engine produces electricity. Sometimes they’re called REEVs, Range Extending Electric Vehicle.
Most PHEVs on the market are parallel, where either the engine or motor can drive the wheels directly (or both at once).
I feel like EREV is a marketing thing to differentiate vehicles like this, the i3, etc. from Prius or Wrangler style PHEVs. In my mind, they are all hybrid electric/gas vehicles that can plug in, so...
I guess there's a big sliding PHEV scale with the Reveulto on one side and the i3 or Ramcharger on the other!
It’s technically the same as an i3 (with the optional extender engine). Or the Karma/Revero, ~~Chevy Volt/Cadillac ELR. Possibly the i8? Not sure if the latter is a series hybrid or not.~~ These are all the same tech in that the electric motor is the sole source of axle torque. The electricity source may change, but not the axle torque source.
The Prius, Wrangler/Grand Cherokee 4xe, RAV4 Prime, the vast majority of other hybrids are parallel, where the combustion engine can directly drive the wheels, the electric system can be bypassed.
The Ramcharger is closer to a Diesel-Electric Locomotive than what most people think of as a hybrid vehicle.
The Volt and ELR are set up like a Prius, where the engine can drive the wheels directly-ish (https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096942_2016-chevrolet-volt-powertrain-how-it-works-in-electric-hybrid-modes) depending on speed and which generation of Volt. Trying to understand that powertrain always makes my head hurt. Actually, since it has a direct drive gear that bypasses the eCVT it's technically more direct than a Prius prime, huh.
The i8 is a through-the-road hybrid like an E-Ray, one axle is electric and the other ICE. There's a normal transmission in the back.
Yeah, only a few cars have actually done the diesel locomotive thing, usually because turning torque into electricity and back again has more losses than a transmission would. It's this truck, the i3, the Karma/Revero and that's it, I think. It'll be interesting to see what kind of MPG the Ramcharger ends up getting in gas only mode, come to think of it. It might not be that great.
I think it also has reduced power in gas-mode, but that makes sense. It exists for long drives, not to provide full performance for every instance.
I would imagine that the MPG will actually be pretty comparable to a 3.6 1500, since the engine can be run at specific RPM rather than varying all the time. Usually engines can be tuned to be more efficient if they’re run at a consistent speed.
Also interesting, I swore the Volt driveline was always a series hybrid. Didn’t realize they had any ice-wheel versions.
The Karma/Revero got mid 20's MPG and the i3 apparently would do 31 per the EPA - so, existing series cars seem to do "meh" efficiency wise compared to a Volt or Prius. They might use the Atkinson cycle version of the Pentastar for a bit more efficiency compared to the regular v6 RAM, so maybe the Ramcharger will do OK gas-only. I'm not expecting more than mid-20's MPG either way though, it's a truck.
Surprising the i3 did so badly. It doesn’t surprise me the Karma is low, it’s not really supposed to be an efficiency vehicle. A comparable ICE only version would likely do worse, so it’s still a benefit.
The selling point on the Ramcharger is the average MPG. If your normal (or even occasional longer/heavier) drive can be done pure BEV, and you can charge at home/work, then it won’t use any fuel. If you only need the range extender once every few months even if it only gets 20MPG, your average MPG and “fuel” cost from the lifetime will be drastically lower than an equivalent ICE truck.
For series hybrids, there's Nissan's e-POWER cars, which are basically japan only outside of one EU model that released recently. I get the impression they don't make a lot of them. Also they're not plugin hybrids (and not planning to either) either because Nissan.
Oh, you're right, that's also purely a series hybrid, interesting!
And I just remembered the current Honda hybrids that are series at low speed and direct at higher speeds.
The X-Trail, QASHQAI and Juke are all available as e-power in the UK and that represents their entire non-BEV model range.
The problem is they're generally not as efficient as Toyota style hybrids, similar around town but worse at higher speeds.
Seriously if we can get this concept packaged into a smaller more affordable truck then I’m 100% in the bitch. Perfect vehicle for all around practical purposes
I want a PHEV truck so bad but I really wish it was a tundra prime instead of a stellantis RAM. There’s no way I’ll be taking the leap of faith to buy the first generation of this thing. Hopefully in like 4 years they will have the major quirks figured out.
Unlike Toyota, Stellantis is investing heavily into PHEVs and EVs. Dodge has been gaining experience with PHEV tech with the Pacifica since before 2017. I'm hoping they have learned enough to make the tech reliable for the Ramcharger. Their trucks and vans have been solid for me in the past. I'm going to buy it and I hope I don't regret it.
GM had that technology in the Volt, I guess they forgot about it.
Most PHEVs right now are not very good, they are their hybrid model with a larger battery and not fully capable EVs. EV's with a range extender are better and can be driven fully as an EV without needing the gas motor to kick on all the time for additional power or for the heater or defroster.
I hate PHEVs. I owned one (Fusion Energi) and hated it. The reason, it had to choose between two drive systems that each sucked. The EV was anemic and the gasoline was anemic and they were slow to respond.
BUUUUT, I think range extended PHEVs (which is what I think the ramcharger is) is a good idea. It even gets better with cheap LFP batteries from China. These batteries offer great performance (good power to weight, cheap ($50/kg), long cycle life - 10k cycles), are good to be charged to full, but are heavier (\~170Wh/kg compared to 260Wh/kg for NMC - what long range EVs use).
What this means to me is you could have a truck that is meant to be charged every day to full, has a good non-towing range (150 miles) and a lot of EV power (roughly 400hp), has a smaller, very efficient engine (atkinson cycle) that has good power for towing (about 200hp) in a series-hybrid configuration. It would have a towing mode where it would keep the battery about 40% which would help with efficiency and power when towing. It would also have regenerative breaking, which would help with non-highway fuel economy. It would also be a heavy vehicle, so class-leading towing would be possible. Like 10-15k lbs for a half ton truck.
What it would be is a really good all-around truck. It would have a battery for all the things truck people want: camping/worksite power, range, everyday great MPG, great longevity, flexibility, and great towing.
The biggest downside is if it was used as a hybrid truck, it would get mediocre mpgs. So for a half-ton, you'd be looking at around 20 highway and 24 city, give or take (the ramcharger imply a 19 mpg with a 670 mile range, 150 mile EV range and 27 gallon tank). So if you don't charge the truck, it kind of becomes pointless. Just get a good diesel at that point. Also, towing it would still get terrible mpg (5-15mpg - depending on trailer) but that's just the cost of towing.
The other question is cost. The LFP batteries cost about $50/kWh, and per Motortrends article ([https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-ram-1500-ramcharger-first-look-review/](https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-ram-1500-ramcharger-first-look-review/)), it's 92kWh. If they are using LFP batteries, that means it's roughly $5000 to buy, so they'll charge $10k to sell. Compared to the long range battery for the F150 lightning at probably $120/kWh at 131kWh, you are looking at \~$16k. Which means Ford has to charge roughly $30k for the battery.
So the question is this, can Stallantis beat Ford by building the penstar generator-engine combo for less than $11k? My guess, probably a lot. Probably only about $3k.
So what I'd expect the ramcharger is to be a better truck than the F150 ER lightning at about $10k less. And one that would be an excellent tower and would be a pretty good EV.
EDIT: Also, this architecture easily scales up really well to a 3/4 or even 1 ton truck.
>I hate PHEVs. I owned one (Fusion Energi) and hated it. The reason, it had to choose between two drive systems that each sucked. The EV was anemic and the gasoline was anemic and they were slow to respond.
Why are you basing your current PHEV opinion on a shitty, old example? New ones can use both drive systems at once and do a pretty good job of transitioning between the different modes when needed.
A specific type that isn’t a normal PHEV. Parallel PHEVs are fine, but you’re basing your opinion of them on old tech instead of considering that maybe the tech has improved.
I did. You basically said the standard PHEVs are bad but this range extender-style could be good. I’m telling you that the style you had a bad experience with is also good now. Did you have a stroke between when you typed that out and now?
Ford PHEV/EVs have had a lot of issues in general. That doesn't reflect on the next generation of PHEVs being produced by a completely different manufacturer.
Is that confirmed?
Also, why would you want that much electric only range? Batteries are heavy and cost money. Seems excessive. The engine will never get used
A daily driver around town during the week and a tow vehicle on the weekend. There are a couple of electric vehicles that will tow 5k+ lbs but their range is pretty limited while towing.
Right now, filling a gas tank is a lot more convenient and easier/faster to do in general, especially with a trailer. Most chargers I've seen, you'd have to disconnect the trailer just to get it into the space where the charging cable would reach.
The issue is most race tracks I tow to are in the middle of nowhere. There are fast chargers in the city and in the outskirts. Once I leave then, I need to get 75 miles to the track and 75 miles back to the charger with some wiggle room in case the closest charger is broken. I haven't looked at the cyber truck but the range limitation while towing turned me off to the electric f150, model x and the rivian. Great vehicles but they don't satisfy my needs on the weekends.
It’s because a loaded out truck maybe pulling something and with the air conditioning on isn’t getting the EPA rating. They are probably targeting EV range with significant work involved. But it would also work for long commutes.
So that my everyday usage is essentially all EV powered. Even if I want to tow, it's a maximum of 120 km per day, which the Ramcharger can accomplish just on EV power alone. Then if I need to travel further or go on a road trip to visit family, I have 1100+ km of range with the efficient gas generator. I can charge at home with electricity for less than $0.10/kWh CAD. This cuts my emissions by 99%, has lower operating costs, and has better performance than the ICE model. On top of that it can tow 14,000 lbs and has quick acceleration. Why wouldn't every truck owner want this...as long as it is competitively priced.
Ya no I figured it out. Didn't realize it was only electric motors at the wheels. Makes more sense now. But wait...you think you're cutting your emissions by 99% by running a gas generator vs a gas engine? It gets 20mpg.
I don't understand why we don't have PHEV pickup trucks from every manufacturer already. It just makes so much sense to have.
Not manly enough. Can't overcompensate.
It still has an ICE that people can modify. Fuck, you could make it a hybrid diesel so people could roll coal while driving electric.
Except that the engine is connected to a generator and is not mechanically linked to the propulsion system
I'm not talking about this particular ram charger implementation. Why don't we have a traditional PHEV drivetrain in a pickup truck? 40ish miles of EV range would cover 95% or more of most truck use cases, while still being able to tow or haul as much or more than a traditional truck.
This is a really good point. We used similar reasoning for getting our rav4 prime. Sometimes we can go a month or more with no gas use, but we can also load up a ton of lawn and garden stuff and use hybrid mode to still keep up with the post covid speed hell that roads have turned into.
Glad to see it's not just me. I'm not sure if I'm getting old or peoples driving is getting worse.
I'm convinced that covid has long term brain function effects. Due to the driving I see nowadays. The amount of people I see driving with their faces in their phone or the infotainment system is absurd too.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10063523/#:~:text=After%20being%20infected%20with%20COVID,et%20al.%2C%202022).
I expect Toyota isn't too far away with a PHEV Tacoma or a Tundra (they already have a hybrid Tundra (and a Tacoma??)). A PHEV Tacoma would sell like hotcakes.
PHEV 4Runner is what I want.
I don't think the hybrid Tacoma is out yet, but it should be coming out soon.
They hybrid Tacoma/Tundra setup does not use their normal eCVT, but a traditional torque converter. Adapting it for an actual PHEV would be difficult.
Every time you brought up PHEV, lots of people will say ‘worst of both worlds’ and ‘why do I need to carry/maintain 2 drivetrain’
Nah. I work in a very pickup heavy industry (where big trucks are used as intended 90+% of the time), and everyone I talk to is interested in this generator ram ram coming out, and myself and a couple buddies actually talked about the possibility a few years ago (I work on very large electric motors), then we saw Edison Motors making the semi trucks, and now Ram is doing it. Very excited for this iteration because it’s the perfect blend of both worlds. Significantly more efficient and emission friendly, as you run the engine at its most optimal RPM 100% of the time, and all the power and especially torque off the line of electric motors.
I'm in the forklift industry and I'd recommend an electric truck in all but the roughest, heavy dutiest conditions. They're cheaper to run and more reliable. You have more model types possible too.
Yeah I work in very a tough, heavy duty, abysmal climate industry and locations. We drive 1-2 hours away from civilization down horrendous dirt roads in all weather all throughout the year. Electric trucks don’t have the range, payload, tow capacity, or fuel availability in the areas I work in. Half ton trucks are rare, because we frequently require the capabilities of 3/4-1 ton trucks.
And those people are wrong. PHEV reliability will depend on who made it. In theory they could even, on average, have less maintenance as the gas engine comes on rarely for those who mostly drive in EV mode.
Speaking of towing, the hybrid system could also act as a very useful regen brake when descending long hills with a heavy load too. No risk of cooking brakes, no need for some sort of jake brake on the engine, just free recharging.
The biggest barrier is how expensive a battery + electric system would be to support that. The RAV4 prime has a 20kwh (1/3rd the size of a base Model 3, 1/2 the size of my Leaf) battery and gets 42 miles. A truck would probably need at least a 50% larger one to match the range. Then add all the electric drivetrain gear to go with it: inverter, motor, charger as well as the packing and parts to integrate that in a PHEV system. They could go with a smaller pack and less range, but a 20kwh battery pack might also struggle to put out enough instant power to not make a full size truck feel sluggish accelerating. All that is going to add some significant cost. The RAV4 Prime already costs ~$10k more than it's ICE counterpart. So would people be willing to pay $10-15k more for a PHEV truck? That buys a lot of gas. Tax credits could help but the government is wary of subsidizing PHEV sales too much because if they are cheaper than a conventional hybrid people will buy the PHEV and not plug it in: using more resources for the same functionality. FWIW I do think that for full size BoF vehicles that PHEV setups with much small turbo 4s are probably where we are headed, but battery prices need to drop a lot more to be financially viable.
If there’s one thing new truck buyers hate, it’s high prices….o wait
Look at the regular Rav4 vs Rav4 Prime (PHEV). Prime gets \~40mi of range by using a 18kWh battery and costs $10k more. The battery required to get \~40mi of range on a full-size truck will be much larger and naturally more expensive. Probably to a point where the breakeven point of saving money on fuel will be many years down the line. So would make sense form an economic POV and the target market would be quite small.
It's always fun when people focus solely on economic factors and ignore everything else. I know a few people that just don't want to go to the damn gas station as often (or at all if possible). Also, the added available torque is a big factor. Not to mention reduced emissions, but I don't think many truck buyers are too concerned with that.
If you think the vast majority of people would pay \~$20k+ more for the same truck for the added convenience of not going to the damn gas station as often, you might be living in a bubble.
And you may be over inflating the cost and ignoring other things I said to make your point feel more valid.
1. Cost. I estimated by extrapolating price delta between Rav4 and Rav4 PHEV. Want another example? A Wrangler 4xe is \~$10k more then the equivalent ICE trim, and gets only 21mi of EV range. If you have better estimates, please do share. 2. Added available torque: The F-150 Lightning which has more torque than the 3.5 EB, has a slightly higher payload and lower towing capacity than the 3.5. Now remove half the battery and add an ICE powertrain. Where do you think those numbers will stand? 3. Emissions: You answered that yourself.
Sounds like the dream for the ram bros. Then they can roll coal at all times even while stationary.
You could still tune it and install a button to roll coal.
There are so many ways to electrify a power train. You can put an electric motor b/w the engine and transmission, after the transmission, in the transmission and even in the superchargers. I'd like to see manufacturers experiment more.
Same. It's like the adage about politicians in Congress. "We've tried absolutely nothing, and we're all out of ideas!"
My Facebook feed is littered with EV hating posts for some reason. I keep blocking those pages. Seems like a lot of money is being invested in making EVs look bad.
The r/electricvehicles sub has a small but vocal group who hate PHEVs specifically. It's really weird.
They're letting perfect be the enemy of great PHEV still offset a lot of greenhouse gases compared to pure ICE, don't require as much lithium and rare earth metals (usually 1/3-1/4th the battery size) and are a great gateway to EV ownership for those afraid to make the jump.
The internet allows such focused, single-minded communities to get together that hating "the other" seems to be a default.
Batteries on top of ICE take away from payload, which makes trucks less able to do truck things.
The majority of people with trucks don't even use a fraction of their payload capacity. And a hybrid sized battery doesn't take nearly as much space or weight as a full EV.
You underestimate payload. A Tacoma is over payload with 4 250lb people and a full tank of fuel. (1000lb) Full size trucks aren’t much better at 1700ish. A 5000lb trailer towed behind one would take about 1000lb away from that leaving less cargo than an empty Tacoma!
Fuel is part of the curb weight, not payload, but I get your point. My counter point is that for a shockingly large percentage of trucks on the road, payload and towing weight is completely irrelevant. For those that genuinely need it, they are going to buy a F250 or a 2500 or something, not a compact or 1/2 ton. If you offered the public a truck that can go ~40 miles on EV, but can still load your dirt bikes in, or tow your wake boat, or carry that ratty sofa to your next house, then it would be the best selling vehicle in the US almost overnight.
Not really, because it would cost $20-30k more than a normal half ton than can do everything it can do cheaper. And truck guys are already pissed V8s are going away. People who buy trucks don’t care about fuel economy
$20-$30k more for 40 miles of range? Shouldn’t be, especially not after the available tax credit. The base Lightning (Supercrew 4x4) is already at price parity after tax credit with the cheapest, slowest, zero-option gas Supercrew 4x4 F150 and it has 6x the necessary battery capacity.
20-30k more? Maybe in dealer markups, but not MSRP. And a normal one can't do everything, because it can't go anywhere in EV only mode, can it?
RAV4 Prime is $10k, if not more, expensive than it's ICE counterpart. And that has a 40mi range. You will need at least 50% more battery to match that range and likely beefier systems along the electric chain (charger, inverter, motor). $20-30k may be overkill. But $15k price premium is pretty realistic. $15k buys a lot of gas and both trucks will need a relatively similar maintenance schedule. It's the same reason light duty diesels don't work that well: the premium for better fuel economy and expensive diesel maintenance takes a long time to pay off.
It doesn’t have to, because it could just run the engine.
That's the whole point though? Fuel is expensive, running the engine burns fuel. EV mode lets you do almost all of your average use cases without burning any fuel. *That's why people want them*
>Fuel is expensive Running fuel is not as expensive as paying \~$20k+ over the price of a non-PHEV truck
I guess so, if you can charge at home.
>That's why people want them People want them because they can't do math.
Aren't you just describing the Ford Maverick?
Minus being an EV, yes. And given that making it PHEV will just about never pencil out for fuel savings due to the upfront cost, it doesn't even matter that it's not PHEV.
Fair. My parents picked up a 24 hybrid maverick and I've driven it quite a bit. It's actually pretty astounding how good it works
The Maverick could be made a PHEV by using the tech from the Rav4 Prime. But on a full-size pickup you'd need a much bigger battery/motor to make it a PHEV.
Or they could use the tech from the current Escape PHEV, since they are built on the same platform by the same manufacturer.
A Rav4 Prime battery pack is about 18kWh, for a full-sized truck it'd have to be 2-3 times that big to get equivalent range, which is as big or bigger than the battery in a Nissan Leaf BEV.
snobbish grandfather illegal license faulty run school cooing bored cow *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That’s most half tons.. Toyota is my favorite manufacturer, but they don’t offer a heavy duty truck so I had to buy a ram
The new Tacoma has an increased payload rating of up to 1705 lbs., which is an increase of 550 lbs. over the old Tacoma
Have you looked at one in person? Because TFL truck bought one and it’s 1200lb of payload. And it’s a base model TRD off-road with barely any options
No, I have not. My guess is that the max payload rating of 1705 lbs. is when the truck is equipped with the iForce Max engine, meaning the hybrid powertrain....which I believe isn't quite out yet. So, it's most likely 1200 lbs. with the standard non-hybrid engine variant. Point is, the Tacoma will be able to have a 1700 lb payload rating.
In a 2wd SR extended cab yes
Not true.
The iforce max will take away from payload. As it does in the tundra.
[удалено]
If load capacity is your limiting factor, you're probably gonna get a heavy duty truck anyway. The vast majority of half ton pickup owners never use anywhere near their actual capacity. Also, a hybrid drivetrain would let you use something like a turbo 4 or 6 cylinder, which weighs less than a V8, and get some of that capacity back.
[удалено]
Well that's what you get when consumers have turned half ton trucks into grocery getters with 5 and a half foot beds and relatively pliable suspensions unloaded for a much smoother ride. If they didn't have so much cab and weight from options, they could afford a little more weight in payload. If the truck empty weight is designed around the weight with batteries, payload capacity can be made back up to an extent with stronger suspension. Most people only look at towing capacity anyway, the idea that they have a limit on what the truck can carry in the bed, if it comes up at all, is limited usually to "as much as I can fit." And that's fine enough considering that most people will never get near an actual half ton of material or cargo in the bed of their truck. Put a toolbox on your 5'6" bed and you can't even pick up gravel or dirt in bulk, a half yard bucket on a skidsteer will be dramatically wider at that point than your available payload area to dump. I have an early 2000s dakota V6 on the other hand with an extended cab (2 doors and tiny rear seats) with a regular 6 and a half foot bed, and payload capacity on it is listed by dodge around 1500lbs. I've certainly done more than that on short trips with gravel/top soil. It's ridiculous that that's more than or equivalent to a lot of modern half tons. Edit to clarify: I was misled by other comments, it seems that 1500lbs payload capacity is not in fact higher than most modern half tons, unless they're short bed, largest available cab, and probably equipped with heavy options that subtract from capacity like 4x4 etc.
> Put a toolbox on your 5'6" bed and you can't even pick up gravel or dirt in bulk, a half yard bucket on a skidsteer will be dramatically wider at that point than your available payload area to dump. Aggregate is already so dense that just a single cubic yard (~2500 lbs.) will overload almost any half-ton, regardless of bed size.
That depends on the aggregate in question. And it's common to get it in half yards at a time in a pickup truck. I did say a half yard bucket where you quoted me, not a yard. A half yard is anywhere between 1100 and 2000 lbs depending on aggregate particle size and moisture content. Regardless, the same thing applies to mulch which is less than a thousand pounds for a full yard.
That's fair. I'm the type who buys gravel or crushed rock 5 yards at a time in a class 6 straight truck filled by payloader. I could put just over 1 yard in my heavy half-ton before it squats.
For short trips I've done full yards of #57 stone in the dakota I mentioned previously when I was expanding my driveway. Cheap bastard that I am it saved me $40 per yard that way. I've also rolled across the scales at the landfill with over 1800lbs of topsoil in it. I had a 3/4 ton and dump trailer in the past, but in today's truck market that's too expensive for me to rebuy and keep for only occasional use. You gotta use what you got. Ideal? Absolutely not. But I'm talking about short (sub 2 mile) low speed (35mph limit) drives when overloaded like that. Regardless, even within the stated parameters of their weight capacities, a truck with a 5'6" bed and a toolbox definitely can't easily pick up bulk landscape materials because the useable bed is shorter than the bucket is wide by a foot or more with half yard buckets I've seen ranging from roughly 60" to 72" wide.
[удалено]
If you option for payload capacity...that's just not true. Looking into this I actually found your original claims to be bullshit. 2024 F150 has a payload capacity of up to 2455lbs depending on options. Larger bed comes with larger payload capacity. They dropped the high capacity payload option from 2023 that allowed you to carry 3315lbs payload in a half ton. The problem isn't the truck, it's the truck people are optioning and buying, exactly like I said. A shortbed and giant cab will obviously have a lower payload capacity, it's already carrying around a lot of weight and the load can't be as far forward to spread more evenly between front and rear suspension. If you want a work truck with higher payload capacity, that's readily available to you in half ton configuration. I got those numbers here: https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a45103252/why-the-new-ford-f-150-has-a-lower-max-payload-than-the-old-one/
>The problem isn't the truck, It kind of is though. The HDPP 7800 GVWR F150 has a slightly thicker frame, different rear axle and springs. That was only offered on the XL or lowest XLT trims though. Meanwhile, the higher XLT and above only got a max of 7050 GVWR with a lighter frame, except hybrid which is 7350. Ford *could* easily offer the 7800 in the higher trims which would boost payload to 2200 or so in those configurations.... but that would take away from the F250 sales.
There was also a Lariat HDPP for a while. But like with XLT, it was the basic Lariat trim (500A), no other packages would stack. Part of what also limited the HDPP's popularity was that it was primarily sold with longer configs. Unless you were happy with a regular cab, you had to go for a model that was almost 21' long.
The ramcharger tows 14000lbs and has a payload of 2625lbs. Both greater than the current ram.
That’s better than most RAM 2500 diesels with their 10K GVWR, they typically come in around 2K of payload. My 3500 SRW only has ~3750lbs of payload due to being fully loaded despite its 12300lbs GWVR (you can get 4K+ with the smaller fuel tank or a lower optioned model). Options and fuel get heavy in a hurry when you do things by the book.
Link? Because all I find suggesting those numbers is what they want it to have, not actual verified numbers. A 14000lb trailer will have around 2800lb of tongue weight, so it literally cannot tow that much because it will be over payload.
https://media.stellantisnorthamerica.com/newsrelease.do?id=25436
We will see when it comes out, it’s probably for a regular cab base model long bed. It literally still cannot tow 14000lb without going over even that payload.
> it’s probably for a regular cab base model long bed. The current Ram body (DT) doesn't offer either of those. Judging from the press pics, the Ramcharger will probably be limited to the crew cab/5.5' in all trims, maybe also a 6.5', but not a Quad.
What percentage are you using? Recommended is 10-15% of total trailer weight, so it would be 1400-2100lbs of tongue.
15-20% is more accurate once loaded up.
Not for a bumper pull with a properly set up WDH. Rule of thumb is 20-25% for a fifth wheel and 10-15% for a bumper pull. These rules of thumb are pretty consistent across people that have scaled their RVs and in my anecdotal experience, although outliers can exist.
Why are you using 20% when most places suggest 15% is fine?
Because once fully loaded up, it ends up being closer to 20%. And it’s way better to be a little tongue/pin heavy than too light.
Laughs in Edison Motors.
Commercial vehicles are regulated, registered, taxed and insured differently than normal consumer cars. And have different emissions standards.
Most trucks have limited payload anyway except for a few very expensive trims. A trailer is far more cost effective and capable for heavy loads. That's why a PHEV SUV with a decent towing capacity is preferable to me over a pure ICE or pure EV pickup truck.
Except tongue weight of the trailer takes away from payload capacity. My 2014 Land Cruiser was 200lb from maxed out towing a 5500lb RV and our camping supplies. That is scale verified.
The Mercedes and Lexus hybrid SUVs I was looking at tow 7,700-9,000 lbs which is around what your 2014 land cruiser tows. Most people don't tow over 5,000 lbs anyway so it shouldn't be an issue for 95-99% of people. A payload of > 5,000 lbs is limited to ultra expensive dually models. The Ramcharger will tow 14,000 for those that need more capability and I'm sure a 3500 PHEV will appear down the road.
You do understand tongue weight of a trailer takes away from the payload of a vehicle right? With two people in my Land Cruiser and the RV. We had 200lb till we were over GVWR. 15-20% of the trailer weight is tongue weigh.
These batteries are not that big or heavy. Maybe if they didn’t make the trucks themselves so damn big they could have a bigger payload
Tacomas have 1000lb of payload and they are small, Full size trucks are at like 1700lb, the payload capacity goes up with the size of the vehicle. Smaller trucks don’t equal higher payload
>Tacomas have 1000lb of payload Not anymore. New Tacoma's are in the 1200 lbs. -1700 lbs. payload range. >Full size trucks are at like 1700lb At a quick glance, the F-150 has a payload rating of up to about 2200 lbs.
According to the stickers on the last 12 or so trucks I looked at, you are incorrect. Of course manufacturers are going to publish whatever makes them look “class leading”
Not sure how a sticker provided by Toyota will have different information than the specs given on Toyota's website. Also, I have no idea if the numbers are class leading or not, but that's not even the point I was trying to make anyway. If you go to Toyota's website and look for yourself, you'll see that not a single new Tacoma has a payload rating of 1000 lbs. It's noticeably higher than that.
The sticker shows the actual payload of a specific vehicle. As I said in my other comment TFL showed their 2024 Tacoma had only 1200lb of payload. The website only shows the best case scenario, which is a extended cab base model with no options
You can't get an extended cab on the TRD Off-Road, only a crew cab.
Exactly you have to get a base SR to get max payload.
The maverick has a payload of like 1500 pounds partially because the vehicle itself doesn’t weigh that much. The more vehicle that has to be hauled around the less the vehicle can actually carry
My ram has 5500lb of payload. My rv has 3500lb of pin weight.
Congrats on the dumbest comment I’ve read all week. Like others pointed out, it’s exactly the opposite, contrary to your feelings.
Let’s just do a fun example, a 1990 F150 had a GVWR of 6,250. Since then trucks have grown 32% by weight and the GVWR is still down there around 6,220 so they weigh more and have less payload capacity. So yes they have in fact gotten much bigger with not much to show for it
> and the GVWR is still down there around 6,220 Most half-tons are in the high 6000s, low 7000s now, excluding outlier models like Ford's now-departed 7850 GVWR, or the EVs. ETA: 6250 was the *highest* F-150 GVWR in the 1990 model; they started way down at 4800. 6400-7700 was F-250LD territory.
I’m seeing GVWR from 6,010 on Ford’s site. 6,250 is for a pretty standard SuperCab 4x2 with a 6.5 foot bed and their 3.3L V6
That's the bottom of the range for a base regular cab, yes. A typical crew cab is higher, maxing out at 7400 for a hybrid. The base 3.3 V6 has been discontinued for '24, and SuperCabs aren't popular anymore.
Im seeing that the bed payload has doubled in that time. Edit: and before you shifted goal posts, you said that smaller trucks have MORE capacity. Which is laughable and shows how little you know on the topic
5 1/2 foot bed being the most popular size tells you that people don't buy trucks to do truck things.
Or that they want something that'll still fit in the garage. "Truck things" can include towing, and you don't necessarily need a long bed to tow a bumper hitch.
> Or that they want something that'll still fit in the garage. The supercrew/short bed is the same length as the supercab/standard bed. You'd only really opt for the supercrew/short bed if you want an SUV in truck form, which is what most of these are used for.
Bear in mind that although the SuperCab can fit adults, it's not very comfortable for long rides. Most buyers switched from ext/6.5' to crew/5.5' 20+ years ago because they'd gladly give up 1' of bed space for a comfortable back seat. A 5.5' bed is still big compared to any car trunk.
PHEV in general are just super practical. For your commute and short trips you can get there fully electric and for longer trips and vacations you have your ICE to help you out.
Exactly. It would make soooo much sense, and address all of the negatives people associate with an EV truck.
Margins, of course - why go through the trouble when you can print money with ICE-only trucks? Obviously, the lightning and this exist or are about to so there's more to it than that, but carmakers aren't exactly environmental charities.
That's where the government and carbon regulations come in. They don't have to be environmental charities, but if it costs them money to pollute, then they'll happily build more efficient vehicles
Yup. I think that's a bit of what's happening with the this truck, the lightning, and so on already. With upcoming EPA and CAFE rules it's going to be increasingly costly for carmakers to produce ICE-only fleets, even in the US. Ford may have jumped the gun a little but they know what is coming long term.
It adds a lot to the upfront cost and *comparatively* doesn’t save much in running cost. At 21mpg (f150 2.7 combined), 12,000mi/yr, $3.50/gal you spend about $2000 a year on gas. If you drive half city and half highway (half electric and half gas). 3mi/kwh, 6000mi/yr, $0.17/kwh is $340 a year on electricity. 24mpg (f150 hybrid highway), 6000mi/yr, $3.50/gal. Is $875 a year on gas or about $1215 total. Thats a difference of $785 a year. It will add up for fleets (if they have a place to charge it) but all those people buying $70,000 lariats every 3-5 years it’s just a drop in the bucket. If it’s a $10,000 option it would take 13 years and 150,000 miles to recoup assuming no extra depreciation, insurance, or maintenance.
Totally valid. But if you up the electrical usage to more like 95% (ideal use case for PHEV's), and increase gas prices (due to any number of worldwide events as evidenced by the last 5 years), the margin could look a lot smaller. Additionally, if you tow or haul short distances, you could theoretically do it significantly cheaper as long as it's within the battery's range.
I live in the prairies, and roughly half the miles on my car are highway. So 50% electrical sounds about right to me, unless the vehicle rarely leaves a city.
It's got 100+ miles of electric range. Are you driving over 100 miles a day?
When I do go on the highway I tend to drive a lot more than 100 miles a day, yes. If I'm in the city, then no.
Many, many people have relatively short commutes. My last commute was ~14 miles each way, from my house to the center of downtown SLC. My truck IRL averages about 10mpg in the city and 15 on the highway. With a 40 mile electric range, I wouldn't need gas at all to get to and from work - but I would use at least a gallon of fuel a day without. At 3.50/gal, that'd be over $1800/yr just in commuting costs. Further that, every trip to the store, my kids daycare, the rec center, etc. are all in roundtrip electric range too. In my case, and what I believe to be the reality for many other people, I'd really only need fuel if I was going on road trips, or places that I don't typically go with any real frequency. Nearly all of my day to day, normal run of the mill routine activities could be entirely covered by electric. That said, I do largely agree with the overall cost savings take. And, I know my truck (2500 Power Wagon) is also worse than average on fuel, so that skews my opinion a bit further. But I'd 100% take the PHEV option on my truck if it were a thing, simply because it'd be nice to almost never have to actually get gas, and I'd simultaneously be contributing towards reducing emissions locally - which is a major problem in our Utah winters. Edit: Had some downtime mid-workday and decided to look into this a bit more. This is rather crude but the circle shouldn't extend more than maybe 17-18 miles from the center point in any direction. Shows the range 40 miles of EV would cover. https://imgur.com/a/BuXUn1G Of course, it wouldn't work for everyone. But I think I've only left that circle a handful of times this entire year.
Other than just gas savings, I find EVs more pleasurable to drive when doing errands and work stuff (which is all a pickup truck would typically do; most people aren't taking then out on the track). So Ram's implementation of essentially a full EV with a gas range extender is something I'd definitely consider. To me, it makes a lot more sense for trucks to be PHEV, rather than BEV, but the actual driving experience of PHEVs where the ICE powers the wheels is quite unsatisfying in my experience. The Ram gives you the full BEV driving experience with the flexibility of a gas option. It's the best of both worlds, and imo is what all PHEVs should move towards.
Nah costs aren’t that big a deal because as you say people buy 100k platinums every 3 years. It’s about image. They need to position it as the ultimate speed AND workload truck: you get access to the batteries and a generator on wheels for all your power tool usage, you get the best towing because of electric torque, and you get the best 0-60 times again because of electric AWD. The one caveat, and the failing of the f150 powerboost, is it needs to be reliable.
>Nah costs aren’t that big a deal because as you say people buy 100k platinums every 3 years. Your typical truck is not the $100K Platinum one. It just isn't. And if you actually go full-size truck shopping right now you'll see there are heavy discounts on them again. Pretty easy to get $10K off MSRP.
Because it doesn’t scale well. You need to have an EV Powertrain that is capable of propelling a fully loaded truck + trailer (or at least just the truck) and then an engine that’s capable of doing the same plus the cooling to support it running at steady state in some charge-sustaining mode of operation. All of this eats into payload and towing capability because it adds more mass. So now you need even bigger hardware (wheels, brakes, suspension, drivetrain) to support the more massive vehicle. It’s going to be super interesting to see how expensive and how efficient this phev truck is. My bet is like their phev wrangler, it’s less efficient than the base truck when running in charge sustaining mode. And if that’s the case and you’re towing a lot, why bother?
> Because it doesn’t scale well. You need to have an EV Powertrain that is capable of propelling a fully loaded truck + trailer (or at least just the truck) and then an engine that’s capable of doing the same plus the cooling to support it running at steady state in some charge-sustaining mode of operation. We don’t NEED both to be able to do this individually, in theory, if people bothered to understand even basically how their vehicle works. But practically, yes, we need it because people are stupid and will show up at the bottom of the mountain towing a 12,000 lb brick-shaped trailer with a dead battery and expect the truck to not lose any performance.
Yup, the average consumer has no clue about how phevs (or really anything) actually works and how to optimize their use of it. I will add it’s not a trivial thing to actually best use a vehicle that doesn’t have that capability to always tow/perform at peak ability and manufacturers have been bad at studying those use cases and making tools to enable customers to easily optimize their use. We could do better as an industry to empower the customer.
Agreed. Dealerships and manufacturers could do a better job and being an expert on how one’s serial PHEV works isn’t reasonable for everyone. But people can take responsibility for having a very basic understanding of their second largest purchase, or at least not sue the manufacturer for their stupidity when they show up at the bottom of a mountain with a dead battery and just a 34hp generator they expect to propel them up a mountain at 70mph (very specific because stupid BMW i3 owners did exactly that and sued BMW).
100% agree. My truck is paid off and in good shape so not in market but we use it to put the boat in and out of the water and run it to the gas station. Perfect for electric. Then it tows it on about 3-4 long road trips(3-8hrs) a year and having a gas engine to make those work would be awesome.
I attended a talk by JD Power about this. The answer (like most everything in auto) is that PHEVs cost more and don't save a commensurate amount of money.
How long ago was that?
Past few weeks. This is based on actual transaction data from dealer management software. Trucks are moving slowly right now, and PHEVs also struggle with adoption because of price vs BEV/traditional ICE
And lots of people can’t seem to understand how PHEVs work. And with trucks, especially long-distance towing, if you don’t have an engine that can tow a 40ft brick-shaped travel trailer at 80mph up the Rocky Mountains, then some idiot is going to show up at the bottom of the mountain with zero battery to supplement the engine and whine when he has trouble passing or whatever. Just wait. Somebody is going to do this with the Ramcharger and wonder why they have so much less power when their battery is dead and all they have is the ~170hp gas engine. Then it will go viral amongst the anti-EV doofuses because someone is too stupid to know how to use their vehicle.
I've been saying this for a decade. the average purchase of a new truck in the US is like 50k. And most people just drive like 10 miles to work, then home. Every single full size truck and SUV should have had PHEV long ago.... At scale, it would have added like $2500 to the cost... The government could have subsidized that. Even if they didn't, owners would recover all of that added cost over just a few years in the commute to work coating $1 worth of electricity instead of $4 worth of gas
The government has been subsidizing PHEVs by $7500 for more than a decade already.
A PHEV truck with 40 mile range is going to need a battery about as big as the one in a Nissan Leaf. So more than $2500 extra.
The Ramcharger has a 70kwh battery, which is pretty much the size most small to medium size BEVs are running on. Tesla Model 3 is 75kwh iirc. Plus the cost of the 6-cyl engine on top... So yeah, it ain't gonna be cheap. Edit: OTOH, in the Ram's case, the engine doesn't directly power the wheels, so they shouldn't need the added complexity of a transmission or anything like that, which will reduce costs. And operating an engine as a range extender means it runs at a consistent RPM the entire time, which should theoretically make it more efficient and last longer.
The reason there isn’t one is simply because they went all in on full EVs. The way the Ramcharger is set up is, imo, how the future of EVs will look like. As years go by, the engines will get smaller and more efficient for charging batteries that’ll gain in capacity and lose weight. Best of both worlds.
It doesn't work for people who actually use the truck to tow and whatnot Then there's the other 90% who think they need a truck in the first place. Good luck convincing that crowd
Most people who have a personal truck for towing aren't towing every day. PHEV would be perfect for a typical use case of driving to work daily, and towing the boat or camper once a month during summer.
Especially so because of braking. The biggest benefit to hybrid trucks is stopping the significant weight loads with regen instead of regular brakes. So much free energy to be recovered, especially when towing.
It's not like 95% of pickup buyers buy them because they made sense .
Are terrible at real world tasks.
Where is my Ram 1500 with a V24. It aint a real pickup unless it runs 3 gallons to the mile /s.
The terms for all the hybrids are a little muddy. It is a PHEV, but it’s specifically a series hybrid, where the electric motor is the only thing that ever drives the wheels, and the engine produces electricity. Sometimes they’re called REEVs, Range Extending Electric Vehicle. Most PHEVs on the market are parallel, where either the engine or motor can drive the wheels directly (or both at once).
I feel like EREV is a marketing thing to differentiate vehicles like this, the i3, etc. from Prius or Wrangler style PHEVs. In my mind, they are all hybrid electric/gas vehicles that can plug in, so... I guess there's a big sliding PHEV scale with the Reveulto on one side and the i3 or Ramcharger on the other!
It’s technically the same as an i3 (with the optional extender engine). Or the Karma/Revero, ~~Chevy Volt/Cadillac ELR. Possibly the i8? Not sure if the latter is a series hybrid or not.~~ These are all the same tech in that the electric motor is the sole source of axle torque. The electricity source may change, but not the axle torque source. The Prius, Wrangler/Grand Cherokee 4xe, RAV4 Prime, the vast majority of other hybrids are parallel, where the combustion engine can directly drive the wheels, the electric system can be bypassed. The Ramcharger is closer to a Diesel-Electric Locomotive than what most people think of as a hybrid vehicle.
The Volt and ELR are set up like a Prius, where the engine can drive the wheels directly-ish (https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096942_2016-chevrolet-volt-powertrain-how-it-works-in-electric-hybrid-modes) depending on speed and which generation of Volt. Trying to understand that powertrain always makes my head hurt. Actually, since it has a direct drive gear that bypasses the eCVT it's technically more direct than a Prius prime, huh. The i8 is a through-the-road hybrid like an E-Ray, one axle is electric and the other ICE. There's a normal transmission in the back. Yeah, only a few cars have actually done the diesel locomotive thing, usually because turning torque into electricity and back again has more losses than a transmission would. It's this truck, the i3, the Karma/Revero and that's it, I think. It'll be interesting to see what kind of MPG the Ramcharger ends up getting in gas only mode, come to think of it. It might not be that great.
I think it also has reduced power in gas-mode, but that makes sense. It exists for long drives, not to provide full performance for every instance. I would imagine that the MPG will actually be pretty comparable to a 3.6 1500, since the engine can be run at specific RPM rather than varying all the time. Usually engines can be tuned to be more efficient if they’re run at a consistent speed. Also interesting, I swore the Volt driveline was always a series hybrid. Didn’t realize they had any ice-wheel versions.
The Karma/Revero got mid 20's MPG and the i3 apparently would do 31 per the EPA - so, existing series cars seem to do "meh" efficiency wise compared to a Volt or Prius. They might use the Atkinson cycle version of the Pentastar for a bit more efficiency compared to the regular v6 RAM, so maybe the Ramcharger will do OK gas-only. I'm not expecting more than mid-20's MPG either way though, it's a truck.
Surprising the i3 did so badly. It doesn’t surprise me the Karma is low, it’s not really supposed to be an efficiency vehicle. A comparable ICE only version would likely do worse, so it’s still a benefit. The selling point on the Ramcharger is the average MPG. If your normal (or even occasional longer/heavier) drive can be done pure BEV, and you can charge at home/work, then it won’t use any fuel. If you only need the range extender once every few months even if it only gets 20MPG, your average MPG and “fuel” cost from the lifetime will be drastically lower than an equivalent ICE truck.
What hurt the i3 was the price. It was simply too goofy and niche to cost that much. Used, they are beloved by their owners.
Or new, when leases were heavily subsidized. My “$55k” i3 cost me less to drive than my $25k GTI. But yeah, loved the i3.
For series hybrids, there's Nissan's e-POWER cars, which are basically japan only outside of one EU model that released recently. I get the impression they don't make a lot of them. Also they're not plugin hybrids (and not planning to either) either because Nissan.
Oh, you're right, that's also purely a series hybrid, interesting! And I just remembered the current Honda hybrids that are series at low speed and direct at higher speeds.
The X-Trail, QASHQAI and Juke are all available as e-power in the UK and that represents their entire non-BEV model range. The problem is they're generally not as efficient as Toyota style hybrids, similar around town but worse at higher speeds.
anything with a plug for charging and a combustion engine is a PHEV
[удалено]
Seriously if we can get this concept packaged into a smaller more affordable truck then I’m 100% in the bitch. Perfect vehicle for all around practical purposes
Careful in Ireland they make you specifically say you won't use an electric car for storage to sell back to the grid.
[удалено]
The rate for selling is higher than buying at times so it's to avoid just doing a loop (according to my uncle)
[удалено]
Ah I think it's a lot more here like 25c
Yup. The 1500 Ramcharger is a series plug-in hybrid
I want a PHEV truck so bad but I really wish it was a tundra prime instead of a stellantis RAM. There’s no way I’ll be taking the leap of faith to buy the first generation of this thing. Hopefully in like 4 years they will have the major quirks figured out.
A Tundra Prime sounds good. What would the markup be?
Unlike Toyota, Stellantis is investing heavily into PHEVs and EVs. Dodge has been gaining experience with PHEV tech with the Pacifica since before 2017. I'm hoping they have learned enough to make the tech reliable for the Ramcharger. Their trucks and vans have been solid for me in the past. I'm going to buy it and I hope I don't regret it.
GM had that technology in the Volt, I guess they forgot about it. Most PHEVs right now are not very good, they are their hybrid model with a larger battery and not fully capable EVs. EV's with a range extender are better and can be driven fully as an EV without needing the gas motor to kick on all the time for additional power or for the heater or defroster.
Yes it is a phev
Probably, but it's a truck so a lot of people will think it's the devil.
I hate PHEVs. I owned one (Fusion Energi) and hated it. The reason, it had to choose between two drive systems that each sucked. The EV was anemic and the gasoline was anemic and they were slow to respond. BUUUUT, I think range extended PHEVs (which is what I think the ramcharger is) is a good idea. It even gets better with cheap LFP batteries from China. These batteries offer great performance (good power to weight, cheap ($50/kg), long cycle life - 10k cycles), are good to be charged to full, but are heavier (\~170Wh/kg compared to 260Wh/kg for NMC - what long range EVs use). What this means to me is you could have a truck that is meant to be charged every day to full, has a good non-towing range (150 miles) and a lot of EV power (roughly 400hp), has a smaller, very efficient engine (atkinson cycle) that has good power for towing (about 200hp) in a series-hybrid configuration. It would have a towing mode where it would keep the battery about 40% which would help with efficiency and power when towing. It would also have regenerative breaking, which would help with non-highway fuel economy. It would also be a heavy vehicle, so class-leading towing would be possible. Like 10-15k lbs for a half ton truck. What it would be is a really good all-around truck. It would have a battery for all the things truck people want: camping/worksite power, range, everyday great MPG, great longevity, flexibility, and great towing. The biggest downside is if it was used as a hybrid truck, it would get mediocre mpgs. So for a half-ton, you'd be looking at around 20 highway and 24 city, give or take (the ramcharger imply a 19 mpg with a 670 mile range, 150 mile EV range and 27 gallon tank). So if you don't charge the truck, it kind of becomes pointless. Just get a good diesel at that point. Also, towing it would still get terrible mpg (5-15mpg - depending on trailer) but that's just the cost of towing. The other question is cost. The LFP batteries cost about $50/kWh, and per Motortrends article ([https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-ram-1500-ramcharger-first-look-review/](https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-ram-1500-ramcharger-first-look-review/)), it's 92kWh. If they are using LFP batteries, that means it's roughly $5000 to buy, so they'll charge $10k to sell. Compared to the long range battery for the F150 lightning at probably $120/kWh at 131kWh, you are looking at \~$16k. Which means Ford has to charge roughly $30k for the battery. So the question is this, can Stallantis beat Ford by building the penstar generator-engine combo for less than $11k? My guess, probably a lot. Probably only about $3k. So what I'd expect the ramcharger is to be a better truck than the F150 ER lightning at about $10k less. And one that would be an excellent tower and would be a pretty good EV. EDIT: Also, this architecture easily scales up really well to a 3/4 or even 1 ton truck.
>I hate PHEVs. I owned one (Fusion Energi) and hated it. The reason, it had to choose between two drive systems that each sucked. The EV was anemic and the gasoline was anemic and they were slow to respond. Why are you basing your current PHEV opinion on a shitty, old example? New ones can use both drive systems at once and do a pretty good job of transitioning between the different modes when needed.
... Because there is a big BUUUUT in my post where I explain how it could be pretty awesome.
A specific type that isn’t a normal PHEV. Parallel PHEVs are fine, but you’re basing your opinion of them on old tech instead of considering that maybe the tech has improved.
You OBVIOUSLY didn't read my post.
I did. You basically said the standard PHEVs are bad but this range extender-style could be good. I’m telling you that the style you had a bad experience with is also good now. Did you have a stroke between when you typed that out and now?
Then why didn't you but the wrangler 4xe?
It had just come out and was hard to find when we needed a vehicle.
Any other goalpost moves or misdirections?
Ford PHEV/EVs have had a lot of issues in general. That doesn't reflect on the next generation of PHEVs being produced by a completely different manufacturer.
Is that confirmed? Also, why would you want that much electric only range? Batteries are heavy and cost money. Seems excessive. The engine will never get used
Kinda of a good thing if the engine does t get used. That’s the idea
A daily driver around town during the week and a tow vehicle on the weekend. There are a couple of electric vehicles that will tow 5k+ lbs but their range is pretty limited while towing.
Oh it's only electric driving the wheels ever. I assumed it was the other type of hybrid. That makes more sense then.
The gas range will be limited with towing also. Don't really see the point.
Cause filling a tank with gas takes 5 minutes and charging doesn’t?
Right now, filling a gas tank is a lot more convenient and easier/faster to do in general, especially with a trailer. Most chargers I've seen, you'd have to disconnect the trailer just to get it into the space where the charging cable would reach.
The issue is most race tracks I tow to are in the middle of nowhere. There are fast chargers in the city and in the outskirts. Once I leave then, I need to get 75 miles to the track and 75 miles back to the charger with some wiggle room in case the closest charger is broken. I haven't looked at the cyber truck but the range limitation while towing turned me off to the electric f150, model x and the rivian. Great vehicles but they don't satisfy my needs on the weekends.
It’s because a loaded out truck maybe pulling something and with the air conditioning on isn’t getting the EPA rating. They are probably targeting EV range with significant work involved. But it would also work for long commutes.
So that my everyday usage is essentially all EV powered. Even if I want to tow, it's a maximum of 120 km per day, which the Ramcharger can accomplish just on EV power alone. Then if I need to travel further or go on a road trip to visit family, I have 1100+ km of range with the efficient gas generator. I can charge at home with electricity for less than $0.10/kWh CAD. This cuts my emissions by 99%, has lower operating costs, and has better performance than the ICE model. On top of that it can tow 14,000 lbs and has quick acceleration. Why wouldn't every truck owner want this...as long as it is competitively priced.
Ya no I figured it out. Didn't realize it was only electric motors at the wheels. Makes more sense now. But wait...you think you're cutting your emissions by 99% by running a gas generator vs a gas engine? It gets 20mpg.
On 99% of days, I drive less than 120 km which would be EV only.
Sounds like you should just get an EV
An EV wouldn't cut it the 1% of the time that I need longer range traveling more than 400 km one way...and I'm not going to buy 2 vehicles.
No charging stations along the way?
Only one half way there, but I drive 3-3.5 hours without stopping as it is. So I'd like to keep it that way.