# New company Nikola Motor working on series hybrid Semi



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/10/nikola-motor-company-zero-one-semi-utv/


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Highlights:

320kWh battery pack
6 motors, 2000hp peak
natural gas turbine range extender
independent suspension on all six wheels
2 speed transmission on each wheel.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Here's another article with more details. This thing is going to be an amazing sight.

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/05/11/nikola-motors-sleek-hybrid-semi-is-tesla-trucks/


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

It's a good start, although for a trans-continental truck I'd prefer to see a flow battery rather than a turbine/generator.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> It's a good start, although for a trans-continental truck I'd prefer to see a flow battery rather than a turbine/generator.


A flow battery would be interesting. The ability to independently scale power and capacity has a lot of advantages in this application. The company that is building this started out in fleet natural gas systems, so they weren't that interested in other options, but it would be interesting to see how big of a flow battery it would take to achieve the 1000 mile range and 400kW output of the turbine (the main battery supplies the rest of the power for 1.5MW peak)


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> A flow battery would be interesting. The ability to independently scale power and capacity has a lot of advantages in this application. The company that is building this started out in fleet natural gas systems, so they weren't that interested in other options, but it would be interesting to see how big of a flow battery it would take to achieve the 1000 mile range and 400kW output of the turbine (the main battery supplies the rest of the power for 1.5MW peak)


Yes, but interestingly weight is not as much a factor for a trans-con truck (and even less for a train) as you would think. Turbines are extremely expensive, although fairly dependable.

I especially believe flow batteries will be the trick for trains. You can simply hook up a couple of extra tank cars for the electrolyte, and change them when / where you change drivers (putting the discharged tanks on a charging station). As solar becomes ever cheaper in the South, we may start to see trains pulling hundreds of tank cars north replacing coal and oil carrying cars.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> Yes, but interestingly weight is not as much a factor for a trans-con truck (and even less for a train) as you would think. Turbines are extremely expensive, although fairly dependable.
> 
> I especially believe flow batteries will be the trick for trains. You can simply hook up a couple of extra tank cars for the electrolyte, and change them when / where you change drivers (putting the discharged tanks on a charging station). As solar becomes ever cheaper in the South, we may start to see trains pulling hundreds of tank cars north replacing coal and oil carrying cars.


That's definitely true for trains, but for trucks regulations cap the gross weight at 80,000 lbs, so that's a big hard limit.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> That's definitely true for trains, but for trucks regulations cap the gross weight at 80,000 lbs, so that's a big hard limit.


So, they might have to fill up a bit more often. That still might not be awful if at least the truck stops along the interstate started having flow battery fueling stations. Such a station would require both a fill and a drain hookup, but since charging would occur all the time thus moving the discharged fluid to the charged fluid container the "tanks" would rarely require refilling except for spillage.

Trucks routinely carry 150 gallons of diesel, just shy of 1,000 lbs. Even if they carried 600 gallons of electrolyte (which admittedly would still not have the range of 150 gallons of diesel) you would only ding capacity by 3,000 lbs out of 80,000, or less than 4% of total gross weight. If your "fuel" cost only $1 per gallon it would be worth it to the large carriers to have their truckers stop more often to refuel. It would also be healthier for the drivers to get out more often and stretch.

Such a vehicle could also use regenerative recharge, possibly regaining a large portion of energy used to climb mountains.


----------



## Electric Avenue (Jul 11, 2016)

This is very impressive.....what they're doing. Crossing big rig technology with locomotive technology via electricity.

The future is with us everyday when innovation like that keeps making things better.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Just spent a weekend with a trucker sharing my home, then re-read the specifics of this article. 320Kwh is definitely a lot of batteries (about equivalent to 40 gallons using our previous 8Kwh/gallon rule); you could make up some of that weight by switching to a microturbine, but any other solution would definitely start chewing into the 80,000# limit. That pack has to be really heavy! But, if it can cut energy use 50% it might pay for itself over time.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> That pack has to be really heavy!


Around 4500 lbs when all is said and done. But they make up for it with a light turbine and a carbon fiber body, so the tractor is actually a little lighter than a typical Diesel tractor.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> Around 4500 lbs when all is said and done. But they make up for it with a light turbine and a carbon fiber body, so the tractor is actually a little lighter than a typical Diesel tractor.


That still has to be a whole lot heavier than the 500hp diesel engine, and you still have to carry fuel. 

I am curious how they came to the conclusion of how large the battery pack should be. The Kwh equivalent of 40 gallons is 20% of the 200 gallon load my friend's truck carries (actually 220 gallons). A 240hp turbine engine weighs around 150 lbs, don't know how much the generator weighs and you still need to add electric motors and possibly keep the gearbox. Less than a diesel perhaps, but still a lot of weight with a 5,000 lb battery pack.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> That still has to be a whole lot heavier than the 500hp diesel engine, and you still have to carry fuel.
> 
> I am curious how they came to the conclusion of how large the battery pack should be. The Kwh equivalent of 40 gallons is 20% of the 200 gallon load my friend's truck carries (actually 220 gallons). A 240hp turbine engine weighs around 150 lbs, don't know how much the generator weighs and you still need to add electric motors and possibly keep the gearbox. Less than a diesel perhaps, but still a lot of weight with a 5,000 lb battery pack.


The battery was sized for specific performance needs, not necessarily just battery only range.

A 450hp Cummins Diesel weighs 3000 lbs. So the battery pack itself weighs more than that. But the rest of the powertrain is relatively light, and like I said, the carbon body allows the overall weight to be a couple hundred pounds less than a traditional tractor.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Hollie Maea said:


> The battery was sized for specific performance needs, not necessarily just battery only range.
> 
> A 450hp Cummins Diesel weighs 3000 lbs. So the battery pack itself weighs more than that. But the rest of the powertrain is relatively light, and like I said, the carbon body allows the overall weight to be a couple hundred pounds less than a traditional tractor.


Well I hope it all works. I do know that the turbine I linked was not necessarily a high-efficiency one, nor might the weight be the same as what they choose for the truck. Now that I think about it, 20% of normal "fuel capacity" might be minimum to make it all work well. It takes about 100hp on straight and level at 75mph for a semi, according to my friend. Your turbine will need to produce more than that to be able to charge the battery while driving, but you want the turbine to be of less power than the diesel to minimize starting and stopping the turbine while still allowing enough juice for a full-power (genset plus battery) long mountain climb.

The next piece of the puzzle is that the turbine, too, needs fuel - and even if it is more efficient than the diesel it will still want about 150 gallons, or 1,000 lbs of fuel. You might trim that to 100 gallons / 650 lbs. But, it may be possible to have electric motors on all 4 drive wheels ala' Tesla, and thus eliminate the transmission - which might save another 1,000 lbs (roughly, I actually have no idea how much they weigh but they look heavy). If the computer(s) controlling it all are smart they will be able to detect slippage independently on each drive wheel, which would provide a huge improvement in safety.

On that final point alone, a modest weight penalty might be worth it.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> But, it may be possible to have electric motors on all 4 drive wheels ala' Tesla, and thus eliminate the transmission - which might save another 1,000 lbs (roughly, I actually have no idea how much they weigh but they look heavy). If the computer(s) controlling it all are smart they will be able to detect slippage independently on each drive wheel, which would provide a huge improvement in safety.


All six wheels have motors. Other than that, this is correct. Combined with this and the independent suspension on each wheel and the very low center of mass, this should be the most stable and safe tractor by a lot.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Tesla doesnt have a motor on each wheel. It has one motor per axle and a reduction transmission (plus differential) for front and another for the rear.
The "Nikola" truck proposes to use a 400 kW turbine to charge the pack and a motor with 2 speed reduction for each wheel.
That is not a lightweight asembly.
Also their comparison of torque, 1650 ft lb for diesel, vs 3700 ft lb for electric motors, seems to forget the multi ratio transmission used on the diesel which would effectively give 20,000+ ft lb at the drive wheels !
There is too much "selling" and "money magic" wrapped up in unproven technical claims, to make this realistic.
I call virtual bullshit until something more than a few CGI graphics are presented !


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Karter2 said:


> Also their comparison of torque, 1650 ft lb for diesel, vs 3700 ft lb for electric motors, seems to forget the multi ratio transmission used on the diesel which would effectively give 20,000+ ft lb at the drive wheels !


Yes, the torque multiplication capabilities of a 20 speed transmission are nothing to sneeze at. With a higher torque motor you can probably get by with fewer gears, but not just 2 or 3.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> I call virtual bullshit until something more than a few CGI graphics are presented !


I don't know if Nikola Motors will succeed, or if they will successfully build this truck, but the design is legitimately amazing.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> With a higher torque motor you can probably get by with fewer gears, but not just 2 or 3.


With the right motors, you can.


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

Smells of vapourware to me.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Moltenmetal said:


> Smells of vapourware to me.


Yes and no. There are obviously enormous challenges to bringing such a prototype to reality, let alone a production run. Even a big established company would be far from certain of success, to speak nothing of a startup, even a well funded one.

On the other hand, the prototype design is largely finished and most of the expensive parts are paid for or even built. I expect we will see the prototype at least. But maybe not "on time".


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> the prototype design is largely finished and most of the expensive parts are paid for or even built. I expect we will see the prototype at least. But maybe not "on time".


.? Is it ?
...do they have a 320kWhr 18650 pack with a 400kW turbine generator and all the controls, cooling systems, inverters,etc ?
Have they built the 250 kW traction motors with multi speed reduction transmissions ?
Something tells me few components from the Zero buggy are going to work on a 80,000 lb long haul rig.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

_Have they built the 250 kW traction motors with multi speed reduction transmissions ?_

What do trains have?
Bombardier were making trains which consisted of 5 cars - four of which had two Cummins 14L engines and generators
Driving all the bogies (10??) 
I wonder what those motors would be like - they had to be geared for over 200mph


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> .? Is it ?
> ...do they have a 320kWhr 18650 pack with a 400kW turbine generator and all the controls, cooling systems, inverters,etc ?
> Have they built the 250 kW traction motors with multi speed reduction transmissions ?


In general, the answer is "yes" or "nearly".


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Photos, videos, .....or it doesnt exist !


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

So...Tesla is working on a Semi. Needless to say, it is going to be difficult for these guys to compete...


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> Photos, videos, .....or it doesnt exist !


Here is a photo they made public of the battery components. I can't show any other pictures.

I understand the skepticism...my word doesn't mean as much as some of the more established posters on this board.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Hollie

Makes sense to me - and there is not too much development required as far as I can see the technology is already in use in trains
So all that is left is the batteries


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

On another thread, Kevin Sharp reminded me of the Wrightspeed company
http://www.wrightspeed.com/the-route-powertrain
..set up by one of the original Tesla founders,..
The Nikola system seems to be similar in many respects to that, just with a different market sector in mind.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> On another thread, Kevin Sharp reminded me of the Wrightspeed company
> http://www.wrightspeed.com/the-route-powertrain
> ..set up by one of the original Tesla founders,..
> The Nikola system seems to be similar in many respects to that, just with a different market sector in mind.


Absolutely, very similar architecture.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

^^ Not any longer, it seems !
Nikola are switching from CNG fueled turbine generator to a 800 v Hydrogen fuel cell for charge generation.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/476763/...natural-gas-plans-switches-to-hydrogen-power/


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hydrogen fuel cell!
Credibility hits zero!


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Yes, i must be missing something here also, .
CNG is not exactly a widely available fuel, but hydrogen supply is as rare as the proverbial rocking horse shit !
However, i notice that the Aussie ACT State Government have just ordered a fleet (20 ?) of Hydrogen fuel cell powered Hyundai cars for trial use in Canberra !
Who is pushing this technology , and why ?
Is it the Oil business ?
Or has there been a major step forward in the tech that suddenly makes it the obvious choice ?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Karter
I think that a lot of senior "decision makers" are numerically illiterate and some of them have some sort of downer on batteries
Even if all of the problems with hydrogen fuel cells are fixed they we will be left with the simple physics that you have got to compress the hell out of hydrogen to get to a useful density and that takes energy

The only way forward that I could see would be in storing the hydrogen in some type of designer liquid fuel


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Duncan said:


> ?....
> The only way forward that I could see would be in storing the hydrogen in some type of designer liquid fuel


 Ahh !..you mean something like H2O ! 
And release the H2 using electrolysis ! 
Agreed, ...so why do so many of the big motor companies keep developing Hv tech ?


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Karter

No I was thinking about a hydrocarbon fuel of some sort - so that the energy is still available
For long distance haulage, aircraft fuel, and heavy duty earthmoving
The energy density in batteries may always be too low

So even in the future when oil is too precious to burn we may still be using a liquid fuel for those applications - something made from water and CO2 using energy from solar panels (or nuclear)

And I have no idea why normally sensible companies are going down that path - they may know something we don't or it could be to support the oil companies - letting people re-charge at home must be a bit unnerving for them


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

There was a British doco on the TV a while back looking at solar power options
..solar farms, domestic Solar systems, etc,..
One item they touched on briefly was a pilot plant in the US that was producing ( small amounts) of liquid hydrocarbon fuel ( synthetic petrol!) from nothing more than air, water vapour, and solar energy ( actual sunlight , not via a PV panel) !
Maybe this ?...http://www.aiche.org/academy/videos...ess-development-and-technoeconomic-evaluation

And yes, following your thought ref hydrocarbon fuel cells, i guess those Nikola guys could be planning on using a gas fueled , Hydrogen fuel cell, in place of their original turbine idea ?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

We'll see how the fuel cell range extender works. I suspect it will be more difficult than NM predicts. They will still be producing the gas turbine version "for international markets" but I suspect that at least at first they'll sell more of those in the US as well. The prototype scheduled to be unveiled in December will have the gas turbine.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Karter2 said:


> There was a British doco on the TV a while back looking at solar power options
> ..solar farms, domestic Solar systems, etc,..
> One item they touched on briefly was a pilot plant in the US that was producing ( small amounts) of liquid hydrocarbon fuel ( synthetic petrol!) from nothing more than air, water vapour, and solar energy ( actual sunlight , not via a PV panel) !
> Maybe this ?...http://www.aiche.org/academy/videos...ess-development-and-technoeconomic-evaluation
> ...


The Navy already figured out how to make diesel (JP-8 equivalent) from seawater and electricity and off-the-shelf stuff. Only problem is that it is energy-inefficient (imagine a battery that requires 5x power in to get 1x power out). Not a bad thing when you have a handy nuke reactor with excess / otherwise unusable capacity and want to power a fleet without refueling tenders.

Hydrogen is just as bad as the above, with additional problems in storage and energy-density.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

If you are using a "free" fuel supply like sunlight the energy efficiency is not as important as the cost efficiency

If the panels that produced the liquid fuel were 1/5th the cost of solar PV then they would produce the same amount of usable energy - but would take up 5 times the space


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Duncan said:


> If you are using a "free" fuel supply like sunlight the energy efficiency is not as important as the cost efficiency
> 
> If the panels that produced the liquid fuel were 1/5th the cost of solar PV then they would produce the same amount of usable energy - but would take up 5 times the space


Exactly so. I still believe that someone is going to crack the nanoantenna challenge (printing the rectifiers in-line with the antennas), which will give us incredibly cheap sheets of 80% efficient solar collectors that will start showing up everywhere. At that point source energy will be "nearly free," and the only questions remaining will be what are the "best" storage methods for a given use.


----------



## tommypress (Jul 20, 2016)

It is great to see new manufacturers and models coming up in the EVs field.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Assuming these are real numbers and not fake placeholders, these guys need to attend to their UTV battery sooner rather than later.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Here is a nice Ted Talks video of Wright on his turbine.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Gearbox housing for one axle. A marvel of machining.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

The prototype truck will be unveiled on Thursday at 6:00PM Pacific time. It will be a sight to see!


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

https://nikolamotor.com


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Hydrogen from solar, 360 planned refuelling stations (open to any vehicle), 800 service/warranty locations


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)




----------



## Coulomb (Apr 22, 2009)

My initial reaction was: oh no, not hydrogen again. But skimming the third video, I think it's looking good. Definitely something to watch.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

The idea of hydrogen as fuel always devolves into a marketing gimmick. If you can get 800 miles range with hydrogen, you can get 1200 miles range with a liquid hydrocarbon. If you can create 800 miles range worth of hydrogen (and compress it) from a solar installation in an hour, the same solar plant can generate 1,600 miles worth of carbon-neutral JP5 substitute from the same electricity and seawater.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/fuel-seawater-whats-catch-180953623/

I believe we will see these wonderful new hybrids, but they won't be powered by hydrogen (except a few as a novelty).


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)




----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Fleet Owner - Nikola seeks to create “all-inclusive” truck model.

Its new Nikola One sleeper tractor, expected to be in production by 2020, will include one million miles of fuel, maintenance service, and even a freight matching service in the purchase price.

http://fleetowner.com/running-green/nikola-seeks-create-all-inclusive-truck-model


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

After watching the video, it occurs to me that there is one advantage to hydrogen fuel. 

It will be very difficult to get value from a stolen truck which must be fueled at stations which check the serial number.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Count me in as one who is also skeptical of the Hydrogen idea. The prototype has a natural gas turbine. If I were them I would stick with that until I figured out if the Hydrogen was going to work.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

I would love to have been a "fly on the wall" at those strategic meetings where the business plan was discussed.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> strategic meetings


That might be overstating things a tad...


----------



## Caps18 (Jun 8, 2008)

I think this is much more likely to work than consumer hydrogen. I just think that they should be using natural gas instead, at least at the beginning. Natural gas infrastructure is built out more. But, maybe they can pull a Tesla and roll out a nationwide network as they are building their semis.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Probably not a big surprise at this point, but I can now reveal that we at EVDrive were significantly involved with the development of this prototype.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> Probably not a big surprise at this point, but I can now reveal that we at EVDrive were significantly involved with the development of this prototype.


Drive train, motors, controllers etc....i understand.
But did you guys also design & build their mystery new battery pack that they are making big claims for ?
And what is the chances of you being involved in the "initial production run" of 50,000 units in the first year ?......
.....1000 , 320kWhr packs per week ! !


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> Drive train, motors, controllers etc....i understand.
> But did you guys also design & build their mystery new battery pack that they are making big claims for ?


We did the design and build of the 315kWh pack in the truck. Pretty advanced pack with liquid cooling, 700VDC nominal and easily able to supply the 3600 Amps the rest of the system is capable of consuming (For short periods of time, it should be able to output over 5000 Amps).

The claims they are making about a 107kWh pack for their UTV? No clue what they are talking about there. We didn't do anything on the UTV except give them the idea 

Also, who knows what is up with the fuel cell. I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Does EVdrive have the resources to supply 1000 units per week they are suggesting will be required ?...
...or is there a major hole in their supply chain ?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> Does EVdrive have the resources to supply 1000 units per week they are suggesting will be required ?...
> ...or is there a major hole in their supply chain ?


They have made no indication that they intend to use us for their production truck, and I can only speculate how they will bring this to mass market.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

In the presentation video, They did identify the company (Fitzgerald ?) that will build (assemble ?) the first 5,000 prime mover units, before they build their own production plant.
But i suspect than anyone with experience of mass producing heavy haul rigs, is not likely to have the expertise in leading edge battery pack builds also ?


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Karter2 said:


> In the presentation video, They did identify the company (Fitzgerald ?) that will build (assemble ?) the first 5,000 prime mover units, before they build their own production plant.
> But i suspect than anyone with experience of mass producing heavy haul rigs, is not likely to have the expertise in leading edge battery pack builds also ?


That would be a reasonable suspicion.

As far as I can tell, they are working with an engineering firm to copy what we did in the prototype. Hard to say how well that will go.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Wired - "Nikola is taking a page out of Tesla's book—a fun happenstance on its own—to make hydrogen-powered trucks a reality"

https://www.wired.com/2016/12/tesla-inspired-truck-might-actually-make-hydrogen-power-happen/


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Whilst i will remain in the "ultra skeptical" group on this whole idea, both technical and financial viability ,..i cannot help but say that T Milton is a very impressive front man who appears to be fully committed to his vision no matter how many issues there may be.
He seems very comfortable infront of a knowledgeable audience and able to answer questions from left field, and the blind side, without hesitation or bluff.
He seems to be even more knowledgeable and competant than Musk in similar situations.
Few technology leaders posess such abilities.
I wish him success....but fear it will not go as he expects !


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

"Turn back the clock to late 2012 and you'll see a map with just six Tesla Superchargers in more or less the same places. At the time, we marveled at how these revolutionary quick-charge stations would enable us to drive our newfangled 2013 Tesla Model S all the way to Lake Tahoe and back. Think of it!

You can see where this is going. Today's Hydrogen Highway is eerily similar to those early days of the Tesla Supercharger Network, and that realization recently prompted Jay Kavanagh and me to concoct a friendly contest. It's the 2016 Toyota Mirai versus the 2016 Tesla Model X, hydrogen versus electricity, fuel cell versus batteries. It's the Hydrogen Highway versus the Tesla Supercharger network.

Place your bets."

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mira...en-highway-vs-tesla-supercharger-network.html


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> <wild hydrogen speculation put in motion by dubya decades ago>


but your god doesn't like hydrogen
https://forums.tesla.com/forum/foru...200-times-energy-density-lithiumion-batteries


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

"U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc. Commits to Adding Nikola’s Zero-Emission, Hydrogen-Electric Trucks to Fleet"

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/12/prweb13905922.htm


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

squawk .


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

dcb said:


> squawk .


This is a completely pointless and childish post. Clearly you dislike hydrogen (and super caps), but I don't understand why you won't allow those that are interested in these topics to post in a forum dedicated to electric cars.

*Please* just ignore the topics that you dislike and let the rest of us contribute in a positive way.


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

please don't mindlessly parrot hype, it is childish and detrimental.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

> This move is the latest example of how U.S. Xpress continues to raise the bar on how truck carriers can embrace green, sustainable solutions as a tool to benefit their drivers and help protect the environment.


Nonsense marketing noise. They see potential cost savings and free publicity, period. As I've pointed out all along, once "sustainable" = "cheaper", the change will come quickly.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

dcb said:


> please don't mindlessly parrot hype, it is childish and detrimental.


This thread is in the "EV News" section of the forum. The fact that U.S. Xpress, one of America's largest private companies, has placed a Nikola One order is relevant to this thread IMO.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

PhantomPholly said:


> Nonsense marketing noise.


Strange how "marketing noise" allows you to undertake a road trip 'faster' than a Model X today;

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mira...n-vs-electricity-road-trip-to-lake-tahoe.html

I fully understand that you don't like hydrogen but that won't stop it's progress nor should it stop balanced discussion on a forum dedicated to the DIY Electric Car.


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

here's some obvious news
Tesla co-founder says hydrogen fuel cells are a ‘scam’
https://electrek.co/2016/05/23/tesla-founder-marc-tarpenning-hydrogen-fuel-cells-scam/


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> Strange how "marketing noise" allows you to undertake a road trip 'faster' than a Model X today;
> 
> https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mira...n-vs-electricity-road-trip-to-lake-tahoe.html


Sure, if you choose precisely the right route.

In the meantime, the vast majority of the population can't even use a Hydrogen car as a daily driver, because they don't live near a fueling station and they can't fill up at home.

If cars were used largely for driving to Lake Tahoe and back, Hydrogen would be a clear winner.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Hollie Maea said:


> If cars were used largely for driving to Lake Tahoe and back, Hydrogen would be a clear winner.


Remember that only 4 years ago you couldn't do that trip in a Tesla (even if you could afford one)... things change


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> Remember that only 4 years ago you couldn't do that trip in a Tesla (even if you could afford one)... things change


Sure, things change. But electric cars never had the "chicken and egg" problem to begin with. Anyone who wanted to could buy one and use it as a daily driver. Even if you lived somewhere with zero EV infrastructure. Because you could charge at home. This built up the critical mass to make it worth while for other entities to build up the infrastructure for longer trips.

The State of California has chosen to create some level of Hydrogen infrastructure. Good on them. But no other entity in the US has shown any interest whatsoever. So the only population centers you can even use a Hydrogen car as a daily driver are LA and the Bay Area.

I enjoyed the Edmunds article. It is no surprise that Hydrogen cars fill up faster than Electrics. But this story could not have happened in any other state. There are literally only 3 H2 filling stations outside of CA in the US.

And even in CA, this trip had to be cherrypicked. Had they decided to go to Yosemite instead? He would have been towing his Mirai the last 20 miles into Coalinga (assuming he did no driving while there). Had they tried to go to Mt. Shasta? Forget about it. He could have gotten there, but not back--for any amount of time or money. Had they decided to hop over the border to Las Vegas? Too far. There are no places there to fuel for the trip back.

Will all this change? It could. If Hydrogen were the only clean alternative, it would. But I fail to see what the initiating factor will be, when you consider that Hydrogen has only one advantage over electric vehicles, and one that only comes into account in corner cases.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> (even if you could afford one)


I just noticed this little jab at Tesla costs. Yes, the current offerings are expensive. But that's for a very nice car.

The only Hydrogen option at the moment is a $60,000 Hydrogen Prius.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

I'm not going around the hydrogen-battery carousel again but will leave you with one consideration... the following statement is only true in the US... most of the worlds population will never have access to home charging because their homes do not have parking.



Hollie Maea said:


> Because you could charge at home


Now back to Nikola Motor


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> Strange how "marketing noise" allows you to undertake a road trip 'faster' than a Model X today;
> 
> https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mira...n-vs-electricity-road-trip-to-lake-tahoe.html
> 
> I fully understand that you don't like hydrogen but that won't stop it's progress nor should it stop balanced discussion on a forum dedicated to the DIY Electric Car.


You completely missed the point. The mindless marketing noise was not about the fact that they proclaim they will use hydrogen (another issue, and one I do suspect Nikola will eventually abandon). Rather it was about the phrasing that tries to make it sound like their company goal in buying these trucks is to "save the earth" when the reality is that they expect to save money and result in more predictable deliveries. Sure, they also think it makes them look good doing it - but "saving the planet" is just marketing spin. No business makes decisions like that unless it helps the bottom line.


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Nikola CEO Says Zero-Emissions Semi-Trucks Face Crunching Demand

“We’ll be booked out at max capacity for probably 10 to 20 years,” just from the demand in the U.S. and Canada, Milton told Inverse recently.

https://www.inverse.com/article/24892-nikola-hydrogen-powered-trucks-2020


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> Now back to Nikola Motor


How about the fact that IT IS NOT AN ELECTRIC CAR?!?



PhantomPholly said:


> ...when the reality is that they expect to save money


yah but if you make slimey "save the earth" claims, you are more likely to get tax dollars for your boondoggle.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

dcb said:


> How about the fact that IT IS NOT AN ELECTRIC CAR?!?


At this point it is a series hybrid with a natural gas range extender. Yes, it has a range extender (like the BMW I3), but it also has the biggest battery of anything out there (315 kWh) and can operate on battery only longer than a Chevy Volt.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> “We’ll be booked out at max capacity for probably 10 to 20 years,” just from the demand in the U.S. and Canada, Milton told Inverse recently.


He's also sold out on Brooklyn Bridges...


----------



## dcb (Dec 5, 2009)

kevin sharpe said:


> “we’ll be booked out at max capacity for probably 10 to 20 years,” just from the demand in the u.s. And canada, milton told inverse recently.


squawk!!!!


----------



## WolfTronix (Feb 8, 2016)

Am I the only one that noticed that they only have one door on the side...
How does the driver get out of the truck when it is laying on its side?

Around here on a windy day there might be 3-4 trucks blown over on the highway. (Rather than put up a wind blocking fence or trees, they have a a sign that says "Caution windy area, next 20 miles").

I guess you can try and kick out that "panoramic window".


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

dcb said:


> How about the fact that IT IS NOT AN ELECTRIC CAR?!?


In fairness, if you used the truck for commuting it would in fact be an electric car. It's only when it's hooked up to an 80,000 lb load that the generator has to come on regularly...



> yah but if you make slimey "save the earth" claims, you are more likely to get tax dollars for your boondoggle.


Ain't that the truth?


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

Inside Nikola one, walk around


----------



## Kevin Sharpe (Jul 4, 2011)

WolfTronix said:


> Am I the only one that noticed that they only have one door on the side...


That was mentioned in one of the Nikola videos, iirc it's because the turbine took up so much space they couldn't fit in the second door  The hydrogen production vehicle will have two


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Kevin Sharpe said:


> iirc it's because the turbine took up so much space they couldn't fit in the second door


That is definitely not correct. The Turbine has zero effect on the body.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

In the Q/A video, the 2nd door question was asked and answered by saying that the show truck was only partially complete and they just didnt have enough time to engineer and finish the second side door and associated body panels.
Same with much of the interior,..its incomplete.
Note , it was also stated that pretty much all of the current truck would have to be redesigned and reengineered from the ground up including revised, smaller , motor reduction units, in order to get the 5th wheel hitch down lower to a standard level. !


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Relevant:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...exaggerated-the-capability-of-his-debut-truck


----------



## MattsAwesomeStuff (Aug 10, 2017)

Ugh.

Playing the "It didn't have X", "I technically never said it had X" game.

$22 billion dollar company, that doesn't even have the key component of its technology available, and released to shell as a driveable vehicle.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

MattsAwesomeStuff said:


> Ugh.
> 
> Playing the "It didn't have X", "I technically never said it had X" game.
> 
> $22 billion dollar company, that doesn't even have the key component of its technology available, and released to shell as a driveable vehicle.


Yeah and he's still lying  Says the motors were "removed for safety reasons". No, he never had them. Just empty shells (impressive CNC shells but still that's the easy part).


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Just another scam!

Tesla was NOT a scam - but most of the "wanna be" outfits are just scams


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Duncan said:


> Just another scam!


Sad but true.


----------



## Hollie Maea (Dec 9, 2009)

Welp...


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

Yep, I called it for exactly what it was, back in post #20 on this thread, in 2016. The CEO exited, rolling downhill with a giant pile of prenegotiated cash, propelled by a final burst of vapourware. Mission accomplished...sucker money taken in giant quantities.


----------

