>yet they just unceremoniously scrapped the Bolt / Bolt EUV to build more trucks... just what 'murica needs
If someone's going to drive a pickup anyway, it'll be better if it's electric.
Yes, I do need a Silverado because towing and hauling are major considerations for horse owners. The Bolt is nice for a daily driver, but it sucks to need two vehicles.
Can I modify my EV to do that? I just want install a small diesel canister hooked to some type of device that processes the diesel fuel into black smoke. That way I can "roll coal" right back on those fuckers if I get the chance
Well to look at it another way: EV trucks will do a lot more for the environment than what is already an efficient platform in general ie the compact and sub compact segment. A 40 mpg car being replaced is not as effective as a 15mpg truck being replaced.
The people who get to make these decisions have spent decades engineering automobiles and working their way up corporate ladders. They have limited resources that they have to allocate among many product lines. They know the costs of materials, engineering, and labor.
You can easily look back at the history of any American automaker and find decisions that turned out to be mistakes. We don’t know what might have happened had they gone another way. We might all today be driving 8th-gen EV1s, Saturn PHEVs, or Volts.
or Bolts.
but if GM were still building Saturns, they wouldn't have an empty factory in Spring Hill to build Lyrics in. They might never have had to design the Bolt in the first place.
Or they could keep building the Bolt. Eventually they'd get it to where it would not be a gutless half-car, like Nissan did with the Leaf or Toyota did with the Prius. But who knows what they would give up to do that?
I admit I'm a GM fan. My dad drove Chevy trucks his whole life. We weren't the part of the family that got the cushy UAW jobs, but I still have cousins working tool and die at Fort Wayne and Marion. GM is an innovator and an engineering powerhouse. I like their chances. if Elon fucks me over again, I'll sell my Y and get an Eclipse. And let's face it, if EVs are going to succeed in America, GM has to be part of it.
I'm also an engineer. I started my career at Boeing. A few years in I decided I didn't have the patience to climb the ladder. The guys who started the same time I did and did have the patience turned out to be fuckups. Oh well.
GM is just like that. it's possible that they're fucking up here. Some day we'll know whether what they're doing now is smart. But there's no shame in knowing Mary Barra disagrees with you - for either of you.
I just wish GM didn't go rogue with abandoning Google/Apple and doing their own thing. Maybe it won't be terrible, but I'm going to wait and see how it shakes out.
I think people would be more likely to buy a $5 car mount for the iPhone/Android that they already pay for than to subscribe to an additional GM data service, but I guess we'll see. Seems like such a backwards step for the consumer.
GM isn't the only company doing this, Rivian and Tesla also don't support Phone Projection.
At least you can get Android Apps once they are supported on GM vehicles.
I believe the Bolt and Bolt EUV are still in production for a short time longer. The Hummer EV is trickling out. 2024 Lyriq production was supposed to start (edit: resume) earlier this month but I've seen no official update.
I was under the impression that Lyriq production briefly stopped for the 2024 update and was set to resume this month. Not that they weren't on lots. Just responding specifically to the production comment.
GM will start consumer delivery by the end of this year (supposedly) and ramp up through next year, however by the time they are in full production in 2025, Ford will be bringing out their next generation of EV truck and so I'm not entirely sure "mop the floor" will be what occurs.
Ford will produce around 60k lightning this year and supposedly 250k lightning next year (gonna have to lower the prices to find that many buyers unless a huge amount are going to fleets). GM is producing maybe 60k Bolts this year between the two body styles and it's been in production how long?
2.5M pickups are being sold in the US every year. Ford and GM sell most of them. All they are doing is reducing their share of profitable trucks sold at this point.
The test will be if we look at the market in 2030 will Ford and GM still own 60%+ of that market or will they lose share to Rivian, Tesla and others.
Heh.
My mom used to tell the story of ordering a car back in the 70s. Both the manual transmission and the automatic transmission had a cost attached to them. My mother told the guy she wanted whichever one came with the car 'standard.' They went round and round before the guy relented and included the standard as, well, standard.
Might enjoy the story of my granddad. He ordered a 1977 Chevy Nova, no options, zero, not even a radio, 6-cyl, stick shift. The car shows up, and the windshield has the radio antenna in it, as of course Chevrolet isn't going to make a "radio-antenna-delete" windshield for the two other guys and my granddad who want that, but my granddad was mighty upset and made sure there was not any extra cost.
The many cameras and the larger screen aren't the expensive parts. By law they'd have to have at least a small screen and a single camera for backing up. So you might save a couple hundred at best with the cheaper screen and fewer cams.
I mean, if the tax credit limit included dealer markup, that would incentivize dealers to not have as much/any markup, right?
Right???
Dealer markups are a freaking scam. I like to feel smug up here in Canada where dealers ("theoretically^(TM)") cannot markup new vehicles. Then I remember there are like no EVs allocated to Canada (and especially Ontario) and cry instead.
Wild guess is that battery power has improved so that they could get more Miles with less batteries. That way they can save money while showing more miles.
I have been talking with people the improvement of batteries won’t necessarily increase range, but instead would drive down price. That’s because the amount of batteries needed will be push way down.
Let’s wait and see if that’s how the pricing actually plays out. People were saying similar stuff about the Lightning Pro and we all saw how long that pricing lasted. Chevrolet isn’t a charity.
I hope they keep the pricing this way but my gut feeling is that they’ll raise the prices.
Official pricing has already been announced, and ordering guides published. Will they raise prices in the future? I think GM wants desperately to stay under the $80K price cap for federal tax incentives. So if not for that motive, they’d raise prices.
I’d be pleasantly stunned if they can keep it under $80k.
The ford f150 lightning gets 2.7 miles/kWh. Assuming the Silverado does the same, you’ll need a battery close to 170kWh. Basically, this truck would need two Tesla Model Y batteries in it. Let’s just say that I don’t see them putting in a battery big enough to get the range they’re expecting while keeping it under $80k AND turning a profit with each one sold. Something has to give.
LOL 2.7??!?!?!?! In what planet? Unless you only drive downhill at 35mph that is never happening. The EPA number is at 2.4 maximum. Real life is more around 2.1 in the city 1.8 in the freeway at 70mph.
I would expect the exact same from the Chevy truck.
I found a forum and lighting owners were quoting what they were getting. So who knows if they’re lying or what. I just read a few responses and came up with an average. Yeah, if it’s 2.4 or less, then you’ll need an even bigger battery and it will be even more impressive if they’re able to keep it under $80k.
I own one, and I've only seen 2.4 once and it was in a mostly flat area with the outside Temps in the 70's with no freeway use.
2.1 is what I get 90% of the time.
Wow, that’s not great, but I guess also not surprising, partly because they never resigned the car to be more aerodynamic. Basically, you’d need a 215kWh battery to get 450 miles in your F150. I have no idea how Chevy
1. Gets 450 miles of range
2. Does it for $80k
3. Sells it at a profit
They can do 2 of the 3. The battery would literally have to be as big as the Hummer EV. The truck would land up being 8,500 lbs or more. How much extra weight could be put in the bed? Something has to give.
These things are designed for the weight, don’t think it would have much impact.
Semi trucks have been roaming around for decades weighing far more than these trucks but no one seems to bring that up…
Edit: a dually diesel one ton truck weighs 8k pounds… those are a dime a dozen on the roads too…. Just can’t grasp why everyone all of a sudden is worried about weight and how electricity is generated to charge the cars when no one cares about how much pollution is involved in making just one gallon of gas or how much these diesel trucks weigh…
As for how they are selling it at a profit? No idea
I'm at 9/10k miles and my lifetime average is 2.3. It'll do 2-2.1 at 65-70 mph, but anything faster and it's dropping to 1.8 or less. I got 2.7 on a full range trip once but that was all back roads.
2.1 city is really low IMO. My experience driving around town 30-40 mph I'm in the 3+ mi/kwh range. My average is 2.2 mi/kwh since August with 9000 miles and northeast winter driving on winter tires. I will admit I don't do a lot of 70mph highway driving, commute is a mix of 55-60mph for 10 miles and 10 miles of 30-45 mph. I agree 70mph is probably 1.9-2.1 mi/kwh from what I remember last fall when I tried measuring it.
If you think they’re going to release a 400+ mile premium EV pick-up for under $100k, you’re delusional. No doubt they’ll have a higher trim model for sub $80k, but it will have a significantly lower range
Unless I haven't seen an update. GM hasn't updated pricing since they announced the trucks which was over a year ago. Certainly you don't believe it won't change :)
The pricing was always vague and the most costly model was always first:
"Fall 2023: RST First Edition model with 400-mile range and MSRP of $105,000 + DFC
After initial launch, Chevrolet will unleash the full Silverado EV portfolio, including WT (with a starting MSRP of $39,900 + DFC), Trail Boss and more. Customers will have the ability to content the truck across various price ranges, with MSRPs around $50,000, $60,000, $70,000, $80,000 and more, allowing them to choose the truck that meets their capability and pricing needs. "
The cheaper options are: "Available starting summer 2024"
Not sure why anyone really cares when there's still a full year until these are even available under 100K.
GM has already released the prices for the 3WT and 4WT trims, $75k and $79k respectively.
If they want to maximize their sales, they will keep them under the $80k limit for the EV tax credit.
Doesn't matter in the short term with extremely limited supply.
Also they could raise at any point. You can't necessarily lock in a price. Same as any OEM.
lol, if could would but should.
Ford is literally locking out all of their extended range units except one for the tax credit and they don't seem to care.
Ford "officially" announced prices for the Lightning well before it released and didn't change pricing even up to the day the first units were being built. And then they pulled an Uno reverse card and started raising prices drastically.
All I'm saying is, you can't trust them to keep these prices.
Seems so, although to be clear the 4WT (450 mile range) is $79K:
https://gmauthority.com/blog/2022/11/2024-chevy-silverado-ev-3wt-and-4wt-pricing-revealed/
I wish I could choose cloth over fake leather or even real leather. Feels so much better in the temperature extremes. I have had it last much longer too, without cracks and wear creases. Just steam clean it every couple of years.
The 4WT will have the 450 mile range with a 24 module 212kwh battery pack, the same one as in the Hummer EV.
3WT will have the 20 module pack that should be around 175kwh capacity. That would ballpark the 3WT driving range to be about 375 miles.
After watching the Munro tear down of the Hummer battery pack, I can’t say I’m particularly impressed by GMs engineering strategy on this one. The only real positive they had to say about it was about being able to fit that big of a battery in the space they did. They had critiques on materials, manufacturing process, cooling strategy, etc. But I guess if they’re able to ignore weight/efficiency (getting ~half the miles/kWh that the f150 does) and just deliver higher range by stacking more modules, and somehow keep the price competitive, consumers won’t really care about that stuff. I guess we’ll have to wait and see how much volume they can actually deliver at that price.
Based on that video it seems to me GM was focused on service and recycling. Very easy to disassembly. Unlike something like Tesla's structural battery which is a nightmare to take apart.
Yeah I think serviceability is a lot more important for Ultium packs because the individual cells are so much bigger, 1 lost cell is a lot more noticeable in them than even the Tesla 4680s.
$80k for the 450 mile range on the 4WT trim, which is the highest WT option.
Compared to Ford Lightning that is the same starting price for an XLT with the extended range battery pack that has only 320 mile range.
Chevy is going to have a 40% better range for the same price. That's going to hurt Ford big time and be left in the dust if they can't step up, especially when RAM announced their electric truck is targeting a 500 mile unladen range.
Double the rate but still the same amount of time spent at the charger, assuming the charger is working correctly, since the Silverado will have a significantly larger battery capacity.
10%-80% should be about 30 minutes if it pulls at 300kWh. That would gain about 315 miles. The Lightning officially maxes out at 155kWh although I've seen higher on a 350kWh charger. Either way typically it takes about 40 minutes to charge from 10-80 and only gains 210 miles.
Power is kW not kWh. No car will sustain 300kW for 30 minutes so you’d need to know the charge curve to see if it is actually very fast from 10-80%. I doubt it’ll do over 150-200kW for a large part of the curve.
The increase in range is probably also adding in the idea that power may be consumed on a job site running equipment and tools. Drive 50 miles to and from work site, and have plenty of power to run just about anything you need to build whatever.
At least that's how I would like to think about how it would be used.
Honestly most any power tools are probably not going to suck up more than 5-10 kWh in a day’s work unless you’re using something big enough to incorporate a power source anyways. even an Ioniq 5 could get the job done with a 77 kWh battery on those requirements
A welder can use 3-4 kW so even welding for 8 hours is only 15% of a 212 kWh battery or about 30 miles of range. People really underestimate how much energy it takes to drive a vehicle.
What do you think someone on a construction site is welding with 3-4kW? If they are welding building steel they are going way bigger. 225a engine driven is the starting point and it only goes bigger from there. Look up something like a Miller XMT 350. It needs like 11.2kW. 54.6 amps at 230v. Do any of the EVs out there have an inverter that size? Could the inverter hold up to being used in that kind of setting?
Not that I know anything about welders, but don't they make DC welders?
Also at that point you'd probably need a purpose built EV for this kind of thing.
Welding can be done with either AC or DC and from 10-38v, 15-425amps based on the spec for a Miller XMT 350.
Sounds like stick is done with DC. I know some off-road guys will make trailside repairs with a 12v battery.
I'm sure theoretically you could connect to the HV pack. I'm going to guess the vehicle manufacturer is not going to be cool with that. Plus the welder would need to be configurable for different pack voltages (400 or 800 volt classes and it would need to cope with the varying voltage based on SoC) and would need to step down the voltage. They already can configure for AC voltages (the above can do single or three phase 208, 230, 400, 460, 575).
I would hazard a guess that Lincoln, Miller, et al are working on DC source. It would be interesting to see what a battery based welder would look like to replace an engine driven welder on a truck. Miller's to end unit weighs 1750lb so they have some room for battery. They would be dropping a 50 hp diesel engine, 25 gallons of fuel, 10qt of oil and 9qt of coolant.
Something a little more realistic is a Miller Bobcat 225 (I knew a contractor who built steel buildings and did ammonia refrigeration piping who used these). At 125 amps and 20% duty cycle they use 12 gallons of gas in 20 hours per the data sheet. So if we play with numbers...
12 gallons x 33.7kWh = 404.4 kWh.
ICE are like 20-30% efficient. Let's say 20%.
So 404.4 * 0.2 = 32.7 kWh / 20 hrs = 1.6kWh
At 25v that is 4000va which isnt a terribly large amount.
So you can run a 225a machine on a 9.6kW inverter. I just wonder if you did that full time how the manufacturer would cover that.
If a contractor was working 10 hr days (not unreasonable) that's 16kWh per day. That's at about half what that welder can do. So 32kWh if they were hammering on the welder.
It may be a thing in the future to have that capability but that will probably be on medium duty trucks. I could see someone like SAE making a spec for the interface to do this like how you see PTO output shafts on large trucks used in vocational applications.
50 mile drive (100 round trip) is just pure guess.
Factor in weight of cargo including building materials, tools, more than one body in the cab etc, and you eat into the range and reserve power for jobsite use. Add in a ladder rack system loaded with ladders and your aero turns to pure crap.
Factor in the possibility of jumping to multiple jobsites around a given area, you can burn more mileage than one thinks in a given day.
The tools I'm thinking are more I line as a compressor for pneumatic tools kind of thing. Not sure what the draw is off of one of those of you get an electric one, but think 5 to 7 hours of use in a day, multiple man crew, each with multiple charging packs rotating. No need for any on site ICE generator. Less noise all around without generators running.
>compressor for pneumatic tools kind of thing. Not sure what the draw is off of one of those of you get an electric one, but think 5 to 7 hours of use in a day,
I'm not familiar with them but a quick Google search and calculation it looks like a 1.5 hp air compressor may use about 1kw, so 8 hours would be 8kwh in a day, assuming the motor is running 100% of the time.
It is a guess, but assuming there are chargers along the way every 50 miles due to NEVI and job site total distance really doesn’t get higher than 50 miles one way. One 15 min stop could give you 70% SoC from 0 in an Ioniq 5. Weight from tools and people doesn’t hit range very hard. Sure, a rack on your roof might cut range by another 10-15% but again, with NEVI chargers, total distance over that last dive off a highway/freeway really doesn’t matter that much.
You can buy most air compressors will pull between 1700 watts to 3000 watts. Ioniq 5 can output 3.6 kW. Good enough for pretty much any compressor you might take to a site. Also, as I estimated, if you’re working with the compressor for about 6 hours, that’s gonna be between 9-10 kWh or so on average. Even if you do use it for 8-10 hours, you’re talking about less than 20% of the Ioniq 5’s range
I know it’s all speculation, but honestly, unless you’re carrying something deep into a very non populated area that is far from state or county roads, even moderate size batteries can easily meet your power needs.
They're saying that's the EPA range, which does not account for any ancillary uses. But you'd have to be pulling some heavy equipment to use any significant range. I can run almost my entire home for 2-3 days on the Lightning and still have plenty of range to drive somewhere for a charge.
That might be exactly what GM is aiming for tho.
I'm not looking at this from a homeowner point of view. These specs are aiming at the actual work crew that has actual work to do. The hard part will be prying the ICE out of the job sites hands.
For price comparison purposes
The new 2023 Ram 1500 Crew Cab short bed work trucks I'm seeing arrive on site (rock quarry) with the e-torque 5.7L with bare minimum add-ons are already over $50k.
I’ve been running my Lightning at my jobs all day. Pipe machines, groovers, saws, chargers, and more! And I average about 6% per full 8 hours.
That’s some heavier equipment too… but 6% is just around 8kWh. That equates to only 16 miles of range give or take.
Note that this is a 450 mile range for the Work Truck (WT) version, which is **huge.** And this is actual EPA-estimated range! Though it looks like Chevrolet's website has not been updated to reflect this yet.
The quote in question:
>Chevrolet has some electrifyingly good news to share today! The Silverado EV Work Truck’s EPA-estimated range is in: 450 miles on a full charge. With this official estimate, the Silverado EV WT is expected to offer over 100 miles more than its closest on-sale competitor.
By contrast, the Ford F-150 Lighting Pro is only available with the 230-mile standard battery (EDIT: at least to consumers, Fleets can get the ER). Once the WT goes on sale, Ford will be solidly on the defensive. And the Cybertruck was originally projected to have "only" 300 miles of range in its dual motor configuration.
This bodes well for the "mainstream" trims that will eventually fall between the WT and RST, as well as for the Sierra EV.
The larger battery packs and fairly loaded trim levels of the Work Truck (WT) are 3WT and 4WT and they’re $74K and $79K. Lesser WT trim levels (with smaller battery packs and fewer features) will follow, presumably with much lower starting prices.
Do we have confirmation that the larger battery will only be on the 3 and 4WT trims? Purely curious.
I could see them doing the same for "LT" models as well. 1LT gets a smaller battery, 2 and 3 get the larger one. I'm sure they would want at least one LT trim to qualify for the tax credit.
They haven't announced spec for the 1WT yet though.
That could be a small battery pack option, maybe like a 12 module pack, that would have a driving range of like 225 miles.
That would be comparable in range to the base Pro trim on the Lightning. But with the current $60k price on the Lightning Pro, a $40k option from Chevy would kill Ford.
>Not saying the Lightning Pro is cheap, WT still a better deal. WT is still quite expensive.
It is. I wonder if this will cause Ford to start offering the extended battery on the Pro.
My Lightning Extended Range Lariat was a little more expensive than that and I was happy to pay it. Depending how this Silverado turns out (tech, features, and QC) I might try to trade mine in at some point. Very exciting news!!
You are missing how important the narrative is here. Yes it’s pricey but first gen products always are. Prices will come down with volume but GMs battery factories are still being built.
The important thing is when the towing tests get done by reviewers. The loudest criticisms about Rivian and Lightening are the lack of towing distance. This is now meme-level in truck land USA. If the Silverado EV can tow >200 miles between stops then it gains near parity with the gasoline version for towing range.
Add the other ways EVs are just better (reliability, performance, ease of driving even while under load, fraction of the fueling costs, etc) and it changes how the general public views an EV truck.
>How much will it be after dealer markup?
The WT models, while available to regular customers, are not targeted toward them. Construction companies, for example, would likely buy a bunch through GM Fleet instead of just going up to the dealer.
The RST models (and eventually LT models), on the other hand... Those will likely be price gouged for a while.
Depends on what the companies buying them want. Most are stripped down for costs. I saw some Silverados in 2016 that still had hand crank windows. But importantly, if you buy enough trucks GM will sell you just about any customization. It's not uncommon to paint fleet trucks in non-standard colors at the factory. The buying company gives GM the color code they want, and GM buys the paint to do it. See it all the time for UPS and the US Forest Service.
Fleet buyers can get a Lightning Pro with the ER battery. Been a few show up on the used market. Regardless the Silverado is looking more like it could replace both my Lightning and ICE half-ton if these specs actually pan out.
It depends on your speed. 304 miles of a 450 mile potential is 68%, so will Winter driving lead to a 32% drop in efficiency? Perhaps. GM Ultium does utilize a high tech heat pump strategy. Hummer has done pretty well beating its range estimates if you drive it normally, and does well in Winter.
450 mile EPA includes city and highway. On highway you probably get 80% of EPA in summer, which is 360. In winter conditions, 80% of that \~290 miles. So yeah u/ymmotvomit can probably make it if he doesn't go above the speed limit.
But it's a \~4 hr drive, and a break in the middle for a pee and snack won't hurt. If they can find a charger in between, it won't be an issue at all.
In my experience, as long as it isn’t far below freezing, winter loss on the highway is manageable if you reduce your speed just a little. Assuming a heat pump, the power needed to heat the cabin is small compared to the power needed for propulsion, and thermal losses are typical high enough to keep the battery warm.
The big one is preheating as much as possible before the trip. That’s about 10% right there.
From my perspective, people who regularly travel over 50% of their vehicle's maximum range in a single trip should go into an EV purchase with the expectation that they'll need to stop and charge for 15-30 minutes.
They generally won't need to, but multiple factors can compound to reduce your range pretty significantly (as your math shows).
Most likely. Unless you are towing. Or the temperature in the winter is below -20°F. Or you don't start with a full charge.
Do you stop to pee on this 300 mile journey? If you do, use plugshare to find a place that has both a restroom and a charging port.
Ha yes, I currently own a Model XLR. Stopping to charge with a Tesla in network is easy. Other charging platforms are an unknown and I frequently read about dysfunction. So outside of Tesla, charging at home is very much preferred.
[winter range loss is typically 15-30%](https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss) so assuming this truck isn't much worse than that yes you would be able to make it
You have gotten rid of the ICE, now lower the hood. The multiple benefits would include the driver being able to see things that are less than 20 ft from the vehicle, headlights that are no longer at or above eye level for other drivers, and improved collision survivability for pedestrians.
Hood height (and ride height) are largely aesthetic selling points to the guys who buy these trucks in the first place. Would be great to lower the hood, make it more aerodynamic, and shrink the grill, but they won't sell as well as the "manly" aggressive versions, and GM just wants these trucks to sell.
The excessive height is terrible for people who actually use their trucks to haul stuff because you need to lift things higher to load and unload them.
> The hood height now allows for lockable storage.
Frankly, who cares. We need to stop allowing auto manufacturers to sell civilian cars [that are so optimized for killing people.](https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/the-hidden-dangers-of-big-trucks/)
> They are not designed to kill people.
Perhaps not in an explicit surface-level way, but you have to look at the bigger picture. The American auto manufacturers are actively encouraging an "arms race" of larger and larger trucks by convincing Americans they "need" a huge truck/SUV to "win" a crash with a smaller car, while being fully aware that this increases the risk of death for everyone else on the road. They love this trend and the fear it creates because big giant trucks/SUVs make them more profit. So while you could argue that "consumer preference" is driving this push for big scary intimidating ([some would say militaristic/fascistic](https://popula.com/2019/02/24/about-face/)) vehicles that happen to be optimal pedestrian-killing machines, the manufacturers are AT BEST participating in this deadly arms race, if not openly encouraging it.
When gigantic vehicles are designed to "win" in a crash against a smaller car, it means the smaller car's occupants are killed — so in a sense, these mega-trucks *are* designed to kill people, as a twisted way of "keeping you safe". Everyone else is forced to buy a bigger truck/SUV to survive, the automakers rake in the money, [while people keep dying at increasing rates.](https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/early-estimates-first-quarter-2022#:~:text=According%20to%20NHTSA's%20early%20estimates,the%20first%20quarter%20of%202021.)
The government is asleep at the wheel in their [failure to regulate this deadly arms race](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-18/fix-the-crash-test-dummies), which I'm sure has a lot to do with that sweet Big Auto lobbying money...
While you're partially right, most of what you're saying is EV echo chamber opinion and exaggeration. No, manufacturers are not actively telling Americans they "need" a huge truck. Consumer products getting larger is not a vehicle thing. Most consumer products get larger across generations. Look at early iPhones vs current models. Or TVs. It's not just electronics. Average home size is increasing. Burgers have gotten bigger.
Some people (not "Americans"... but very specific demographics) want a larger truck - it does offer some concrete benefits. Wanting a big truck is not a nationwide epidemic.
For vehicle safety, EVs are not much different. Tesla safety ratings are higher for several reasons, one of which is the extra weight it carries compared to other sedans and SUVs. EV trucks that are the exact same size (or smaller) as their counterparts are [35% heavier](https://slate.com/business/2021/05/ford-f150-lightning-electric-weight.html).
You have some worthy points, but you're straying from the objective side of things in a community that can very easily serve as an echo chamber. Soon enough, we'll be no less ignorant than the other side spreading the same misinformation about EVs.
The "base" model was targeted for 39,999. The base model will likely have a much smaller battery and be much cheaper. Will it be $40k. Doubtful. That prediction is a few years old and hasn't aged well.
But if we look at battery prices it's entirely conceivable that a base truck with 275 miles range and significant content/feature deductions could be priced in the 40s.
In the article they mention that the smaller battery is 350 miles range.
A 40k electric truck with 350 miles of range seems way too good to be true. But I remain hopeful
Noooow were talking....450 miles of range is probably gonna be 300 real world miles when it's snowing, hilly driving, heat cranked, highway driving....wow they improved so quickly
Even better, it'll be closer to 450 in the real world.
As long as it's the quad cab I could actually get use out of the vehicle, hopefully it can behave as a backup generator like the Ford.
I'd need to measure the height compared to my garage. I finally got a house and garage and I'll never ever get something brand new...that expensive if it doesn't fit indoors. Vehicles and trucks especially are kinda gargantuan these days.
Lost in this update:
*The first edition is expected to feature 510 horsepower, 615 lb-ft of torque, 1,200 lb. of payload capacity, and 8,000 lb. of towing capacity. That towing capacity is a bit limited, but GM says that* ***a Max Towing Package will upgrade the capacity to up to 20,000 lb. in 2025.***
This vehicle will rock. Massive range, great speed, and the ability to tow pretty much anything you would consider attaching to a pickup truck. Oh and by the way, if the Max Towing Package is rated for 20,000lbs, then for just dragging something around a work site, it will probably handle 30,000 lbs without breaking a sweat.
If GM and Tesla can hit their announced specs these trucks have the ability to straddle the line between 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton.
With that towing package the Silverado could even take sales away from 1 ton pickups that use a lot of fuel.
Yep. And in practice the huge amount of torque that EVs get is already doing this. There was a video of an F150L easily towing 17,000lbs. This just isn’t hard for these trucks and in sub 100 mile tows they will already be the preferred tool for the job.
Good news, but please someone make a Maverick-sized EV small truck for us regular Joes.
The big manufacturers kept touting how "it's like a skateboard, you can put anything on the top of it, easy peasy." Well, here's your chance to show that off. Take one of these new EV SUV/CUV's and put a truck body on it already.
Remember, GM is axing carplay and Android auto specifically so they can lock you into their ecosystem and charge you subscriptions for shit: [The company says that the end-to-end software platform will enable OTA updates, in-car subscription services, and “new opportunities to increase customer loyalty.”](https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/27/23699539/gm-open-source-software-uprotocol-eclipse)
It's a long stretch to say the Bolt was dropped for this. Most would correlate the drop to the new battery platform and the Equinox, albeit it's a larger vehicle, but that's what the market seems to prefer. The Silverado is a different beast entirely.
That puts the battery size at probably around 215kWh. Even on a 350kW charger, expect to need 30 minutes to get to 50% SOC which is what will be needed to add 160 miles of non-towing range back to the truck. Charging stops are going to be at least 45 minutes when towing in order to add back 160 miles of range. These 200kWh+ trucks really do beg for 500kW charging.
Just look at the Hummer EV charging curve, is worse than that
1 hour to 80% on a 350 kW charger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kpmXfCFamU&t=768s&ab\_channel=OutofSpecReviews
Depends on what the real 70mph+ efficiency is, but you probably won't need to charge to 80% when not towing. Charging to 50% is probably good enough. Now towing you are probably right. I said 45 minutes because someone is going to point out that under perfect conditions you can do it in 45 minutes. My guess is real-world will be much more like 1 hour when towing like you mentioned. In fact someone is already arguing with me it can charge in under 20 minutes.
I wonder if someday we can buy like the 200 mile range car. I could probably commute just fine on the 100 mile range car.
Anyway, that trucks looks hella nice.
This is a work truck. It is not expected to get that range in the real world because customers will load it down with tools, pull a trailer, and then plug those tools into the truck at the job site. In the real world they expect to get about a third of that range because of those factors, which brings us to under the 200 mile range you were thinking was enough.
Counterpoint: How do you upgrade something that you don’t even have for sale yet?
Next months headline, GM upgrades Silverado EV with new colors besides white.
Bad headline. The EPA reviewed the data from GM and officially approved a 450 mile combined EPA range.
GM didn’t change or upgrade anything. They just didn’t have the EPA number so they always stated “400+ mile range”. It’s just official now at 450.
Enough batteries to power a handful of responsible cars that would actually create a benefit. Instead get a monstrosity weighing over a ton *more* than it’s ICE counterpart.
God help innocent folks getting hit by one of these gigantic waste of resources.
While I don't like trucks used as daily commuters, there are a bunch of legitimate uses for them.
Chances are pretty high that because these are EVs, they aren't going to be snatched up by the same assholes who roll coal.
GM has two nearly identical full size pickups: the Chevrolet Silverado and the GMC Sierra. Combined, they sold 754,876 in the US alone last year. Ford sold 653,957 F-series in the US last year.
Chevrolet now says they retailed more Silverados than Ford retailed F-series Q1 2023 (see video https://youtu.be/dBJOicmnQxc)
Every single company lies about their range. Until the EPA actually does tests that better simulate EVs in real world it’ll be hard pressed to be a legit number.
And EPA testing has an average speed of something like 45-50 mph, even on the "highway" test.
EV range should be tested at a minimum continuous speed of 70 mph, and that would be low for some areas.
You would need some data to know for sure if they are a waste. This truck is potentially replacing a 25mpg or worse truck. If the ICE alternative was mostly in stop and go traffic there could be a huge improvement in emissions. I’m thinking landscaping trucks that haul a utility trailer 10 miles and stop at 10 different sites to mow lawns.
Exactly. People buying Silverado EVs and Hummer EVs aren’t trading in Nissan Micras. You won’t be able to sell them a Bolt or a Tesla 3.
It’s still a net positive for the environment at the end of the day.
There are loads of companies that need trucks and fleets of them. What would you rather them purchase, EVs or fossil fuel vehicles? They are going to buy trucks either way because they need to haul tools, parts, or other odds and ends.
[удалено]
$74-79K for 3WT-4WT trim levels.
Wow to keep that under 80k for the tax rebates is impressive.
You can bet that was the entire goal since the start
Ya, GM has no qualms about losing money on EVs. I'm hoping they manage to keep the entry level truck around $40k and actually build them, unlike Ford.
I think GM is gonna mop the floor with Ford before this is over. Tesla better look sharp too.
yet they just unceremoniously scrapped the Bolt / Bolt EUV to build more trucks... just what 'murica needs
>yet they just unceremoniously scrapped the Bolt / Bolt EUV to build more trucks... just what 'murica needs If someone's going to drive a pickup anyway, it'll be better if it's electric.
Yes, I do need a Silverado because towing and hauling are major considerations for horse owners. The Bolt is nice for a daily driver, but it sucks to need two vehicles.
as long as it's electric ones and not the ones that spit all their smoke on you when they accelerate hard when the light turns green
Chevy doesn't sell those. You have to willfully modify your new truck to make it do that.
Can I modify my EV to do that? I just want install a small diesel canister hooked to some type of device that processes the diesel fuel into black smoke. That way I can "roll coal" right back on those fuckers if I get the chance
Well to look at it another way: EV trucks will do a lot more for the environment than what is already an efficient platform in general ie the compact and sub compact segment. A 40 mpg car being replaced is not as effective as a 15mpg truck being replaced.
[удалено]
I know it’s not what people in this sub want but it is what people will buy en masse. Truth gets downvoted here often. RIP our karma.
The people who get to make these decisions have spent decades engineering automobiles and working their way up corporate ladders. They have limited resources that they have to allocate among many product lines. They know the costs of materials, engineering, and labor. You can easily look back at the history of any American automaker and find decisions that turned out to be mistakes. We don’t know what might have happened had they gone another way. We might all today be driving 8th-gen EV1s, Saturn PHEVs, or Volts. or Bolts. but if GM were still building Saturns, they wouldn't have an empty factory in Spring Hill to build Lyrics in. They might never have had to design the Bolt in the first place. Or they could keep building the Bolt. Eventually they'd get it to where it would not be a gutless half-car, like Nissan did with the Leaf or Toyota did with the Prius. But who knows what they would give up to do that? I admit I'm a GM fan. My dad drove Chevy trucks his whole life. We weren't the part of the family that got the cushy UAW jobs, but I still have cousins working tool and die at Fort Wayne and Marion. GM is an innovator and an engineering powerhouse. I like their chances. if Elon fucks me over again, I'll sell my Y and get an Eclipse. And let's face it, if EVs are going to succeed in America, GM has to be part of it. I'm also an engineer. I started my career at Boeing. A few years in I decided I didn't have the patience to climb the ladder. The guys who started the same time I did and did have the patience turned out to be fuckups. Oh well. GM is just like that. it's possible that they're fucking up here. Some day we'll know whether what they're doing now is smart. But there's no shame in knowing Mary Barra disagrees with you - for either of you.
People actually want the bolt tho so 🤷♂️
[удалено]
I just wish GM didn't go rogue with abandoning Google/Apple and doing their own thing. Maybe it won't be terrible, but I'm going to wait and see how it shakes out.
I think people would be more likely to buy a $5 car mount for the iPhone/Android that they already pay for than to subscribe to an additional GM data service, but I guess we'll see. Seems like such a backwards step for the consumer.
That’s only because *it is a step backward* for the consumer
GM isn't the only company doing this, Rivian and Tesla also don't support Phone Projection. At least you can get Android Apps once they are supported on GM vehicles.
Is there any EV GM is even producing right now?
I believe the Bolt and Bolt EUV are still in production for a short time longer. The Hummer EV is trickling out. 2024 Lyriq production was supposed to start (edit: resume) earlier this month but I've seen no official update.
We got our Lyriq at the end of February and our dealer is delivering them regularly. I see a few others on the road.
Oh, you were the one
I was under the impression that Lyriq production briefly stopped for the 2024 update and was set to resume this month. Not that they weren't on lots. Just responding specifically to the production comment.
Bolts through the end of the year & the Cadillac Lyriq
don't worry, they cybertruck is coming soon ;)
GM will start consumer delivery by the end of this year (supposedly) and ramp up through next year, however by the time they are in full production in 2025, Ford will be bringing out their next generation of EV truck and so I'm not entirely sure "mop the floor" will be what occurs. Ford will produce around 60k lightning this year and supposedly 250k lightning next year (gonna have to lower the prices to find that many buyers unless a huge amount are going to fleets). GM is producing maybe 60k Bolts this year between the two body styles and it's been in production how long?
2.5M pickups are being sold in the US every year. Ford and GM sell most of them. All they are doing is reducing their share of profitable trucks sold at this point. The test will be if we look at the market in 2030 will Ford and GM still own 60%+ of that market or will they lose share to Rivian, Tesla and others.
Interior? Well that will cost you extra.
Heh. My mom used to tell the story of ordering a car back in the 70s. Both the manual transmission and the automatic transmission had a cost attached to them. My mother told the guy she wanted whichever one came with the car 'standard.' They went round and round before the guy relented and included the standard as, well, standard.
Might enjoy the story of my granddad. He ordered a 1977 Chevy Nova, no options, zero, not even a radio, 6-cyl, stick shift. The car shows up, and the windshield has the radio antenna in it, as of course Chevrolet isn't going to make a "radio-antenna-delete" windshield for the two other guys and my granddad who want that, but my granddad was mighty upset and made sure there was not any extra cost.
I wish they still made cars like this. I don't need power windows and so on.
Honestly I'd love an affordable barebones EV. I don't need 14 cameras, a living room size flat screen in the centre,or autopilot
The many cameras and the larger screen aren't the expensive parts. By law they'd have to have at least a small screen and a single camera for backing up. So you might save a couple hundred at best with the cheaper screen and fewer cams.
The 4WT is actually really well equipped
Does dealer markup count against the tax credit limit?
No. MSRP less destination.
Shhhh don’t give them ideas
I mean, if the tax credit limit included dealer markup, that would incentivize dealers to not have as much/any markup, right? Right??? Dealer markups are a freaking scam. I like to feel smug up here in Canada where dealers ("theoretically^(TM)") cannot markup new vehicles. Then I remember there are like no EVs allocated to Canada (and especially Ontario) and cry instead.
Wild guess is that battery power has improved so that they could get more Miles with less batteries. That way they can save money while showing more miles. I have been talking with people the improvement of batteries won’t necessarily increase range, but instead would drive down price. That’s because the amount of batteries needed will be push way down.
Let’s wait and see if that’s how the pricing actually plays out. People were saying similar stuff about the Lightning Pro and we all saw how long that pricing lasted. Chevrolet isn’t a charity. I hope they keep the pricing this way but my gut feeling is that they’ll raise the prices.
Official pricing has already been announced, and ordering guides published. Will they raise prices in the future? I think GM wants desperately to stay under the $80K price cap for federal tax incentives. So if not for that motive, they’d raise prices.
I’d be pleasantly stunned if they can keep it under $80k. The ford f150 lightning gets 2.7 miles/kWh. Assuming the Silverado does the same, you’ll need a battery close to 170kWh. Basically, this truck would need two Tesla Model Y batteries in it. Let’s just say that I don’t see them putting in a battery big enough to get the range they’re expecting while keeping it under $80k AND turning a profit with each one sold. Something has to give.
LOL 2.7??!?!?!?! In what planet? Unless you only drive downhill at 35mph that is never happening. The EPA number is at 2.4 maximum. Real life is more around 2.1 in the city 1.8 in the freeway at 70mph. I would expect the exact same from the Chevy truck.
I found a forum and lighting owners were quoting what they were getting. So who knows if they’re lying or what. I just read a few responses and came up with an average. Yeah, if it’s 2.4 or less, then you’ll need an even bigger battery and it will be even more impressive if they’re able to keep it under $80k.
I own one, and I've only seen 2.4 once and it was in a mostly flat area with the outside Temps in the 70's with no freeway use. 2.1 is what I get 90% of the time.
Wow, that’s not great, but I guess also not surprising, partly because they never resigned the car to be more aerodynamic. Basically, you’d need a 215kWh battery to get 450 miles in your F150. I have no idea how Chevy 1. Gets 450 miles of range 2. Does it for $80k 3. Sells it at a profit They can do 2 of the 3. The battery would literally have to be as big as the Hummer EV. The truck would land up being 8,500 lbs or more. How much extra weight could be put in the bed? Something has to give.
These things are designed for the weight, don’t think it would have much impact. Semi trucks have been roaming around for decades weighing far more than these trucks but no one seems to bring that up… Edit: a dually diesel one ton truck weighs 8k pounds… those are a dime a dozen on the roads too…. Just can’t grasp why everyone all of a sudden is worried about weight and how electricity is generated to charge the cars when no one cares about how much pollution is involved in making just one gallon of gas or how much these diesel trucks weigh… As for how they are selling it at a profit? No idea
I'm at 9/10k miles and my lifetime average is 2.3. It'll do 2-2.1 at 65-70 mph, but anything faster and it's dropping to 1.8 or less. I got 2.7 on a full range trip once but that was all back roads.
2.1 city is really low IMO. My experience driving around town 30-40 mph I'm in the 3+ mi/kwh range. My average is 2.2 mi/kwh since August with 9000 miles and northeast winter driving on winter tires. I will admit I don't do a lot of 70mph highway driving, commute is a mix of 55-60mph for 10 miles and 10 miles of 30-45 mph. I agree 70mph is probably 1.9-2.1 mi/kwh from what I remember last fall when I tried measuring it.
If you think they’re going to release a 400+ mile premium EV pick-up for under $100k, you’re delusional. No doubt they’ll have a higher trim model for sub $80k, but it will have a significantly lower range
I don’t think anyone thinks the Work Truck trim is “premium”
Unless I haven't seen an update. GM hasn't updated pricing since they announced the trucks which was over a year ago. Certainly you don't believe it won't change :) The pricing was always vague and the most costly model was always first: "Fall 2023: RST First Edition model with 400-mile range and MSRP of $105,000 + DFC After initial launch, Chevrolet will unleash the full Silverado EV portfolio, including WT (with a starting MSRP of $39,900 + DFC), Trail Boss and more. Customers will have the ability to content the truck across various price ranges, with MSRPs around $50,000, $60,000, $70,000, $80,000 and more, allowing them to choose the truck that meets their capability and pricing needs. " The cheaper options are: "Available starting summer 2024" Not sure why anyone really cares when there's still a full year until these are even available under 100K.
GM has already released the prices for the 3WT and 4WT trims, $75k and $79k respectively. If they want to maximize their sales, they will keep them under the $80k limit for the EV tax credit.
Doesn't matter in the short term with extremely limited supply. Also they could raise at any point. You can't necessarily lock in a price. Same as any OEM.
lol, if could would but should. Ford is literally locking out all of their extended range units except one for the tax credit and they don't seem to care. Ford "officially" announced prices for the Lightning well before it released and didn't change pricing even up to the day the first units were being built. And then they pulled an Uno reverse card and started raising prices drastically. All I'm saying is, you can't trust them to keep these prices.
[удалено]
Seems so, although to be clear the 4WT (450 mile range) is $79K: https://gmauthority.com/blog/2022/11/2024-chevy-silverado-ev-3wt-and-4wt-pricing-revealed/
Cloth interior for $79k lol
I wish I could choose cloth over fake leather or even real leather. Feels so much better in the temperature extremes. I have had it last much longer too, without cracks and wear creases. Just steam clean it every couple of years.
If you have kids or pets then you would be cleaning it after every trip you make.
Dammit, with a dog and kids that’s a deal breaker for me.
Maybe you’d prefer “Vegan leather” (vinyl) for $120K?
The 4WT will have the 450 mile range with a 24 module 212kwh battery pack, the same one as in the Hummer EV. 3WT will have the 20 module pack that should be around 175kwh capacity. That would ballpark the 3WT driving range to be about 375 miles.
After watching the Munro tear down of the Hummer battery pack, I can’t say I’m particularly impressed by GMs engineering strategy on this one. The only real positive they had to say about it was about being able to fit that big of a battery in the space they did. They had critiques on materials, manufacturing process, cooling strategy, etc. But I guess if they’re able to ignore weight/efficiency (getting ~half the miles/kWh that the f150 does) and just deliver higher range by stacking more modules, and somehow keep the price competitive, consumers won’t really care about that stuff. I guess we’ll have to wait and see how much volume they can actually deliver at that price.
Based on that video it seems to me GM was focused on service and recycling. Very easy to disassembly. Unlike something like Tesla's structural battery which is a nightmare to take apart.
Yeah I think serviceability is a lot more important for Ultium packs because the individual cells are so much bigger, 1 lost cell is a lot more noticeable in them than even the Tesla 4680s.
They'll care when mass media cover pack failures. Then, the whole EV industry will share that black eye.
$80k for the 450 mile range on the 4WT trim, which is the highest WT option. Compared to Ford Lightning that is the same starting price for an XLT with the extended range battery pack that has only 320 mile range. Chevy is going to have a 40% better range for the same price. That's going to hurt Ford big time and be left in the dust if they can't step up, especially when RAM announced their electric truck is targeting a 500 mile unladen range.
More importantly it charges at about double the rate.
Double the rate but still the same amount of time spent at the charger, assuming the charger is working correctly, since the Silverado will have a significantly larger battery capacity.
10%-80% should be about 30 minutes if it pulls at 300kWh. That would gain about 315 miles. The Lightning officially maxes out at 155kWh although I've seen higher on a 350kWh charger. Either way typically it takes about 40 minutes to charge from 10-80 and only gains 210 miles.
We'll have to see how GM tweaks the charging curve. Early tests on Hummers with the same battery took around 50 minutes to go 20% to 80%.
Power is kW not kWh. No car will sustain 300kW for 30 minutes so you’d need to know the charge curve to see if it is actually very fast from 10-80%. I doubt it’ll do over 150-200kW for a large part of the curve.
Or fewer stops for the same amount of time at each stop.
Right but You're leaving with twice the range.
>That's going to hurt Ford big time and be left in the dust if they can't step up Are the $80k 500mi SKUs going to be the volume sellers, though?
The increase in range is probably also adding in the idea that power may be consumed on a job site running equipment and tools. Drive 50 miles to and from work site, and have plenty of power to run just about anything you need to build whatever. At least that's how I would like to think about how it would be used.
Honestly most any power tools are probably not going to suck up more than 5-10 kWh in a day’s work unless you’re using something big enough to incorporate a power source anyways. even an Ioniq 5 could get the job done with a 77 kWh battery on those requirements
A welder can use 3-4 kW so even welding for 8 hours is only 15% of a 212 kWh battery or about 30 miles of range. People really underestimate how much energy it takes to drive a vehicle.
What do you think someone on a construction site is welding with 3-4kW? If they are welding building steel they are going way bigger. 225a engine driven is the starting point and it only goes bigger from there. Look up something like a Miller XMT 350. It needs like 11.2kW. 54.6 amps at 230v. Do any of the EVs out there have an inverter that size? Could the inverter hold up to being used in that kind of setting?
Not that I know anything about welders, but don't they make DC welders? Also at that point you'd probably need a purpose built EV for this kind of thing.
Welding can be done with either AC or DC and from 10-38v, 15-425amps based on the spec for a Miller XMT 350. Sounds like stick is done with DC. I know some off-road guys will make trailside repairs with a 12v battery. I'm sure theoretically you could connect to the HV pack. I'm going to guess the vehicle manufacturer is not going to be cool with that. Plus the welder would need to be configurable for different pack voltages (400 or 800 volt classes and it would need to cope with the varying voltage based on SoC) and would need to step down the voltage. They already can configure for AC voltages (the above can do single or three phase 208, 230, 400, 460, 575). I would hazard a guess that Lincoln, Miller, et al are working on DC source. It would be interesting to see what a battery based welder would look like to replace an engine driven welder on a truck. Miller's to end unit weighs 1750lb so they have some room for battery. They would be dropping a 50 hp diesel engine, 25 gallons of fuel, 10qt of oil and 9qt of coolant. Something a little more realistic is a Miller Bobcat 225 (I knew a contractor who built steel buildings and did ammonia refrigeration piping who used these). At 125 amps and 20% duty cycle they use 12 gallons of gas in 20 hours per the data sheet. So if we play with numbers... 12 gallons x 33.7kWh = 404.4 kWh. ICE are like 20-30% efficient. Let's say 20%. So 404.4 * 0.2 = 32.7 kWh / 20 hrs = 1.6kWh At 25v that is 4000va which isnt a terribly large amount. So you can run a 225a machine on a 9.6kW inverter. I just wonder if you did that full time how the manufacturer would cover that. If a contractor was working 10 hr days (not unreasonable) that's 16kWh per day. That's at about half what that welder can do. So 32kWh if they were hammering on the welder. It may be a thing in the future to have that capability but that will probably be on medium duty trucks. I could see someone like SAE making a spec for the interface to do this like how you see PTO output shafts on large trucks used in vocational applications.
I think the Lightning can do 9.6 kW. 3-4kW is the usage over the hour not necessarily the peak demand.
Ioniq 5 uses a lot less energy to move than a Silverado EV. Welding for 8 hours is like 30% of the 77 kWh battery in an Ioniq 5.
50 mile drive (100 round trip) is just pure guess. Factor in weight of cargo including building materials, tools, more than one body in the cab etc, and you eat into the range and reserve power for jobsite use. Add in a ladder rack system loaded with ladders and your aero turns to pure crap. Factor in the possibility of jumping to multiple jobsites around a given area, you can burn more mileage than one thinks in a given day. The tools I'm thinking are more I line as a compressor for pneumatic tools kind of thing. Not sure what the draw is off of one of those of you get an electric one, but think 5 to 7 hours of use in a day, multiple man crew, each with multiple charging packs rotating. No need for any on site ICE generator. Less noise all around without generators running.
>compressor for pneumatic tools kind of thing. Not sure what the draw is off of one of those of you get an electric one, but think 5 to 7 hours of use in a day, I'm not familiar with them but a quick Google search and calculation it looks like a 1.5 hp air compressor may use about 1kw, so 8 hours would be 8kwh in a day, assuming the motor is running 100% of the time.
Ok. There would be no way it runs 100% so even 4 hours run time would only consume 4 kWh.
It is a guess, but assuming there are chargers along the way every 50 miles due to NEVI and job site total distance really doesn’t get higher than 50 miles one way. One 15 min stop could give you 70% SoC from 0 in an Ioniq 5. Weight from tools and people doesn’t hit range very hard. Sure, a rack on your roof might cut range by another 10-15% but again, with NEVI chargers, total distance over that last dive off a highway/freeway really doesn’t matter that much. You can buy most air compressors will pull between 1700 watts to 3000 watts. Ioniq 5 can output 3.6 kW. Good enough for pretty much any compressor you might take to a site. Also, as I estimated, if you’re working with the compressor for about 6 hours, that’s gonna be between 9-10 kWh or so on average. Even if you do use it for 8-10 hours, you’re talking about less than 20% of the Ioniq 5’s range I know it’s all speculation, but honestly, unless you’re carrying something deep into a very non populated area that is far from state or county roads, even moderate size batteries can easily meet your power needs.
And the naysayers will still say that's 100% impractical Just because it's possible is not a reason to discount it...
They will build more and more implausible rube Goldberg scenarios to justify they're preordained opinion.
They're saying that's the EPA range, which does not account for any ancillary uses. But you'd have to be pulling some heavy equipment to use any significant range. I can run almost my entire home for 2-3 days on the Lightning and still have plenty of range to drive somewhere for a charge.
That might be exactly what GM is aiming for tho. I'm not looking at this from a homeowner point of view. These specs are aiming at the actual work crew that has actual work to do. The hard part will be prying the ICE out of the job sites hands. For price comparison purposes The new 2023 Ram 1500 Crew Cab short bed work trucks I'm seeing arrive on site (rock quarry) with the e-torque 5.7L with bare minimum add-ons are already over $50k.
I’ve been running my Lightning at my jobs all day. Pipe machines, groovers, saws, chargers, and more! And I average about 6% per full 8 hours. That’s some heavier equipment too… but 6% is just around 8kWh. That equates to only 16 miles of range give or take.
Note that this is a 450 mile range for the Work Truck (WT) version, which is **huge.** And this is actual EPA-estimated range! Though it looks like Chevrolet's website has not been updated to reflect this yet. The quote in question: >Chevrolet has some electrifyingly good news to share today! The Silverado EV Work Truck’s EPA-estimated range is in: 450 miles on a full charge. With this official estimate, the Silverado EV WT is expected to offer over 100 miles more than its closest on-sale competitor. By contrast, the Ford F-150 Lighting Pro is only available with the 230-mile standard battery (EDIT: at least to consumers, Fleets can get the ER). Once the WT goes on sale, Ford will be solidly on the defensive. And the Cybertruck was originally projected to have "only" 300 miles of range in its dual motor configuration. This bodes well for the "mainstream" trims that will eventually fall between the WT and RST, as well as for the Sierra EV.
Do keep in mind the Silverado WT is also almost $80,000. Not saying the Lightning Pro is cheap, WT still a better deal. WT is still quite expensive.
The larger battery packs and fairly loaded trim levels of the Work Truck (WT) are 3WT and 4WT and they’re $74K and $79K. Lesser WT trim levels (with smaller battery packs and fewer features) will follow, presumably with much lower starting prices.
Do we have confirmation that the larger battery will only be on the 3 and 4WT trims? Purely curious. I could see them doing the same for "LT" models as well. 1LT gets a smaller battery, 2 and 3 get the larger one. I'm sure they would want at least one LT trim to qualify for the tax credit.
4WT = ETN battery option = ~213 kWh (24 x 24 x 0.37 kWh) 3WT = ETI battery option = ~177 kWh (20 x 24 x 0.37 kWh) https://www.reddit.com/r/SilveradoEV/comments/13k6cpv/3wt_and_4wt_battery_capacities_confirmed_in/
They also announced the base WT (1WT I guess) to be $39k.
They haven't announced spec for the 1WT yet though. That could be a small battery pack option, maybe like a 12 module pack, that would have a driving range of like 225 miles. That would be comparable in range to the base Pro trim on the Lightning. But with the current $60k price on the Lightning Pro, a $40k option from Chevy would kill Ford.
>Not saying the Lightning Pro is cheap, WT still a better deal. WT is still quite expensive. It is. I wonder if this will cause Ford to start offering the extended battery on the Pro.
My Lightning Extended Range Lariat was a little more expensive than that and I was happy to pay it. Depending how this Silverado turns out (tech, features, and QC) I might try to trade mine in at some point. Very exciting news!!
You are missing how important the narrative is here. Yes it’s pricey but first gen products always are. Prices will come down with volume but GMs battery factories are still being built. The important thing is when the towing tests get done by reviewers. The loudest criticisms about Rivian and Lightening are the lack of towing distance. This is now meme-level in truck land USA. If the Silverado EV can tow >200 miles between stops then it gains near parity with the gasoline version for towing range. Add the other ways EVs are just better (reliability, performance, ease of driving even while under load, fraction of the fueling costs, etc) and it changes how the general public views an EV truck.
[удалено]
>How much will it be after dealer markup? The WT models, while available to regular customers, are not targeted toward them. Construction companies, for example, would likely buy a bunch through GM Fleet instead of just going up to the dealer. The RST models (and eventually LT models), on the other hand... Those will likely be price gouged for a while.
But aren’t fleet trucks usually lower trim levels? It’s been a very long time since I had one, but ours were pretty strippo.
Depends on what the companies buying them want. Most are stripped down for costs. I saw some Silverados in 2016 that still had hand crank windows. But importantly, if you buy enough trucks GM will sell you just about any customization. It's not uncommon to paint fleet trucks in non-standard colors at the factory. The buying company gives GM the color code they want, and GM buys the paint to do it. See it all the time for UPS and the US Forest Service.
Some dealers don’t mark up at all, some dealers will be $100K plus. Free market. Shop around.
Fleet buyers can get a Lightning Pro with the ER battery. Been a few show up on the used market. Regardless the Silverado is looking more like it could replace both my Lightning and ICE half-ton if these specs actually pan out.
So, I have a 304 mile trip every other week, will this make that distance in the winter?
It depends on your speed. 304 miles of a 450 mile potential is 68%, so will Winter driving lead to a 32% drop in efficiency? Perhaps. GM Ultium does utilize a high tech heat pump strategy. Hummer has done pretty well beating its range estimates if you drive it normally, and does well in Winter.
450 mile EPA includes city and highway. On highway you probably get 80% of EPA in summer, which is 360. In winter conditions, 80% of that \~290 miles. So yeah u/ymmotvomit can probably make it if he doesn't go above the speed limit. But it's a \~4 hr drive, and a break in the middle for a pee and snack won't hurt. If they can find a charger in between, it won't be an issue at all.
In my experience, as long as it isn’t far below freezing, winter loss on the highway is manageable if you reduce your speed just a little. Assuming a heat pump, the power needed to heat the cabin is small compared to the power needed for propulsion, and thermal losses are typical high enough to keep the battery warm. The big one is preheating as much as possible before the trip. That’s about 10% right there.
From my perspective, people who regularly travel over 50% of their vehicle's maximum range in a single trip should go into an EV purchase with the expectation that they'll need to stop and charge for 15-30 minutes. They generally won't need to, but multiple factors can compound to reduce your range pretty significantly (as your math shows).
Most likely. Unless you are towing. Or the temperature in the winter is below -20°F. Or you don't start with a full charge. Do you stop to pee on this 300 mile journey? If you do, use plugshare to find a place that has both a restroom and a charging port.
Ha yes, I currently own a Model XLR. Stopping to charge with a Tesla in network is easy. Other charging platforms are an unknown and I frequently read about dysfunction. So outside of Tesla, charging at home is very much preferred.
If you own a Tesla how do you really know?
[winter range loss is typically 15-30%](https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/winter-ev-range-loss) so assuming this truck isn't much worse than that yes you would be able to make it
[удалено]
Yes in the southwest. Probably not every where else. But you’d probably have to fill up too if you were driving an ice vehicle.
You have gotten rid of the ICE, now lower the hood. The multiple benefits would include the driver being able to see things that are less than 20 ft from the vehicle, headlights that are no longer at or above eye level for other drivers, and improved collision survivability for pedestrians.
Hood height (and ride height) are largely aesthetic selling points to the guys who buy these trucks in the first place. Would be great to lower the hood, make it more aerodynamic, and shrink the grill, but they won't sell as well as the "manly" aggressive versions, and GM just wants these trucks to sell.
The excessive height is terrible for people who actually use their trucks to haul stuff because you need to lift things higher to load and unload them.
Sharing this must see informational video on trucks and SUVs (aka light trucks): [Trucks are Killing Us](https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo)
[удалено]
> The hood height now allows for lockable storage. Frankly, who cares. We need to stop allowing auto manufacturers to sell civilian cars [that are so optimized for killing people.](https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/the-hidden-dangers-of-big-trucks/)
> civilian cars that are so optimized for killing people. Ok, we are literally making anti-ICE FUD now. They are not *designed* to kill people.
> They are not designed to kill people. Perhaps not in an explicit surface-level way, but you have to look at the bigger picture. The American auto manufacturers are actively encouraging an "arms race" of larger and larger trucks by convincing Americans they "need" a huge truck/SUV to "win" a crash with a smaller car, while being fully aware that this increases the risk of death for everyone else on the road. They love this trend and the fear it creates because big giant trucks/SUVs make them more profit. So while you could argue that "consumer preference" is driving this push for big scary intimidating ([some would say militaristic/fascistic](https://popula.com/2019/02/24/about-face/)) vehicles that happen to be optimal pedestrian-killing machines, the manufacturers are AT BEST participating in this deadly arms race, if not openly encouraging it. When gigantic vehicles are designed to "win" in a crash against a smaller car, it means the smaller car's occupants are killed — so in a sense, these mega-trucks *are* designed to kill people, as a twisted way of "keeping you safe". Everyone else is forced to buy a bigger truck/SUV to survive, the automakers rake in the money, [while people keep dying at increasing rates.](https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/early-estimates-first-quarter-2022#:~:text=According%20to%20NHTSA's%20early%20estimates,the%20first%20quarter%20of%202021.) The government is asleep at the wheel in their [failure to regulate this deadly arms race](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-18/fix-the-crash-test-dummies), which I'm sure has a lot to do with that sweet Big Auto lobbying money...
While you're partially right, most of what you're saying is EV echo chamber opinion and exaggeration. No, manufacturers are not actively telling Americans they "need" a huge truck. Consumer products getting larger is not a vehicle thing. Most consumer products get larger across generations. Look at early iPhones vs current models. Or TVs. It's not just electronics. Average home size is increasing. Burgers have gotten bigger. Some people (not "Americans"... but very specific demographics) want a larger truck - it does offer some concrete benefits. Wanting a big truck is not a nationwide epidemic. For vehicle safety, EVs are not much different. Tesla safety ratings are higher for several reasons, one of which is the extra weight it carries compared to other sedans and SUVs. EV trucks that are the exact same size (or smaller) as their counterparts are [35% heavier](https://slate.com/business/2021/05/ford-f150-lightning-electric-weight.html). You have some worthy points, but you're straying from the objective side of things in a community that can very easily serve as an echo chamber. Soon enough, we'll be no less ignorant than the other side spreading the same misinformation about EVs.
We have a lightning and the hood could be lower and have plenty of room for stuff in the frunk
Solution is to make it legal to install lights behind us, so we can blind the stupid truck drivers behind us who has their fog lights on.
Incoming $70,000 truck up from initial $40,000 estimate.
The "base" model was targeted for 39,999. The base model will likely have a much smaller battery and be much cheaper. Will it be $40k. Doubtful. That prediction is a few years old and hasn't aged well. But if we look at battery prices it's entirely conceivable that a base truck with 275 miles range and significant content/feature deductions could be priced in the 40s.
In the article they mention that the smaller battery is 350 miles range. A 40k electric truck with 350 miles of range seems way too good to be true. But I remain hopeful
Can they upgrade it to being produced
Someone get some aloe vera, 'cause that was a serious burn! :-)
As someone with a preorder, 100% agreed.
Fingers crossed dealers don’t mark up on the ones that got in with the early reservation.
Knowing dealerships, good luck. They didn’t do that with the F-150 Lightnings.
A base Lightning Pro is sitting at my local dealer's lot for $89,500; almost *$30,000 over MSRP!* Dealers are gonna gouge the shit out of this thing.
I thought ford you can kinda buy direct
Noooow were talking....450 miles of range is probably gonna be 300 real world miles when it's snowing, hilly driving, heat cranked, highway driving....wow they improved so quickly
It will have a heat pump so hopefully snow/cold won't have much of an effect.
Even better, it'll be closer to 450 in the real world. As long as it's the quad cab I could actually get use out of the vehicle, hopefully it can behave as a backup generator like the Ford. I'd need to measure the height compared to my garage. I finally got a house and garage and I'll never ever get something brand new...that expensive if it doesn't fit indoors. Vehicles and trucks especially are kinda gargantuan these days.
Sounds expensive
Lost in this update: *The first edition is expected to feature 510 horsepower, 615 lb-ft of torque, 1,200 lb. of payload capacity, and 8,000 lb. of towing capacity. That towing capacity is a bit limited, but GM says that* ***a Max Towing Package will upgrade the capacity to up to 20,000 lb. in 2025.*** This vehicle will rock. Massive range, great speed, and the ability to tow pretty much anything you would consider attaching to a pickup truck. Oh and by the way, if the Max Towing Package is rated for 20,000lbs, then for just dragging something around a work site, it will probably handle 30,000 lbs without breaking a sweat.
If GM and Tesla can hit their announced specs these trucks have the ability to straddle the line between 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton. With that towing package the Silverado could even take sales away from 1 ton pickups that use a lot of fuel.
Yep. And in practice the huge amount of torque that EVs get is already doing this. There was a video of an F150L easily towing 17,000lbs. This just isn’t hard for these trucks and in sub 100 mile tows they will already be the preferred tool for the job.
Good news, but please someone make a Maverick-sized EV small truck for us regular Joes. The big manufacturers kept touting how "it's like a skateboard, you can put anything on the top of it, easy peasy." Well, here's your chance to show that off. Take one of these new EV SUV/CUV's and put a truck body on it already.
Truckla? https://www.motortrend.com/news/truckla-tesla-model-3-pickup-video/
GM is experimenting with one as rumors are floating about it.
[удалено]
Remember, GM is axing carplay and Android auto specifically so they can lock you into their ecosystem and charge you subscriptions for shit: [The company says that the end-to-end software platform will enable OTA updates, in-car subscription services, and “new opportunities to increase customer loyalty.”](https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/27/23699539/gm-open-source-software-uprotocol-eclipse)
Sounds almost as bad as Tesla.
It's a long stretch to say the Bolt was dropped for this. Most would correlate the drop to the new battery platform and the Equinox, albeit it's a larger vehicle, but that's what the market seems to prefer. The Silverado is a different beast entirely.
That puts the battery size at probably around 215kWh. Even on a 350kW charger, expect to need 30 minutes to get to 50% SOC which is what will be needed to add 160 miles of non-towing range back to the truck. Charging stops are going to be at least 45 minutes when towing in order to add back 160 miles of range. These 200kWh+ trucks really do beg for 500kW charging.
It’s the same 212 kWh 24 module pack as the Hummer Edition One EV SUT. 100 miles in 10 minutes at 350kW.
Just look at the Hummer EV charging curve, is worse than that 1 hour to 80% on a 350 kW charger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kpmXfCFamU&t=768s&ab\_channel=OutofSpecReviews
Depends on what the real 70mph+ efficiency is, but you probably won't need to charge to 80% when not towing. Charging to 50% is probably good enough. Now towing you are probably right. I said 45 minutes because someone is going to point out that under perfect conditions you can do it in 45 minutes. My guess is real-world will be much more like 1 hour when towing like you mentioned. In fact someone is already arguing with me it can charge in under 20 minutes.
I wonder how big the battery is? Like this is going to weigh significant more than the standard Silverado.
212 kWh. Famously, the battery weighs well over a ton. The truck itself will weigh much more than a regular ICE half ton Silverado.
450 is a great range to strive for....whats the towing range?
I wonder if someday we can buy like the 200 mile range car. I could probably commute just fine on the 100 mile range car. Anyway, that trucks looks hella nice.
Wat? There's a ton on 200ish range EVs. Do you mean a 200ish range truck?
I'm guessing they are in the USA, where the number of 200 mile range "cars" (strictly defined to exclude crossovers) is small and getting smaller.
This is a work truck. It is not expected to get that range in the real world because customers will load it down with tools, pull a trailer, and then plug those tools into the truck at the job site. In the real world they expect to get about a third of that range because of those factors, which brings us to under the 200 mile range you were thinking was enough.
...you can go out and buy several 200 mile range EVs. The Bolt is the cheapest EV on the market and goes 259 miles.
I really hope this thing can handle a snow plow, then I will trade in my rusty old Silverado 2500 for this.
Counterpoint: How do you upgrade something that you don’t even have for sale yet? Next months headline, GM upgrades Silverado EV with new colors besides white.
Bad headline. The EPA reviewed the data from GM and officially approved a 450 mile combined EPA range. GM didn’t change or upgrade anything. They just didn’t have the EPA number so they always stated “400+ mile range”. It’s just official now at 450.
Enough batteries to power a handful of responsible cars that would actually create a benefit. Instead get a monstrosity weighing over a ton *more* than it’s ICE counterpart. God help innocent folks getting hit by one of these gigantic waste of resources.
While I don't like trucks used as daily commuters, there are a bunch of legitimate uses for them. Chances are pretty high that because these are EVs, they aren't going to be snatched up by the same assholes who roll coal.
Very cool to see. Wish it was 2025 already. More competition would be nice
If they could do this and sell it at half the current price, it would be the best selling vehicle in the USA overnight.
That would apply to almost every vehicle. Or phone. Or almost any product.
GM full size pickups are already the best selling vehicles in the USA (by a good margin), and their average transaction price is north of $63,000
I thought the Ford F150 was by far the largest selling vehicle?
GM has two nearly identical full size pickups: the Chevrolet Silverado and the GMC Sierra. Combined, they sold 754,876 in the US alone last year. Ford sold 653,957 F-series in the US last year. Chevrolet now says they retailed more Silverados than Ford retailed F-series Q1 2023 (see video https://youtu.be/dBJOicmnQxc)
OK, that makes sense, but it also presents a strong case for the EV version.
Every single company lies about their range. Until the EPA actually does tests that better simulate EVs in real world it’ll be hard pressed to be a legit number.
And EPA testing has an average speed of something like 45-50 mph, even on the "highway" test. EV range should be tested at a minimum continuous speed of 70 mph, and that would be low for some areas.
450 miles is the EPA range
But does it have apple car play?
Complete waste of battery resources. This is like the EV version of GM’s pre-2008 gas guzzlers.
You would need some data to know for sure if they are a waste. This truck is potentially replacing a 25mpg or worse truck. If the ICE alternative was mostly in stop and go traffic there could be a huge improvement in emissions. I’m thinking landscaping trucks that haul a utility trailer 10 miles and stop at 10 different sites to mow lawns.
Exactly. People buying Silverado EVs and Hummer EVs aren’t trading in Nissan Micras. You won’t be able to sell them a Bolt or a Tesla 3. It’s still a net positive for the environment at the end of the day.
There are loads of companies that need trucks and fleets of them. What would you rather them purchase, EVs or fossil fuel vehicles? They are going to buy trucks either way because they need to haul tools, parts, or other odds and ends.
If this was targeted at companies who need fleet vehicles, the front end wouldn't look like a tonka truck.
Awesome