2025 Ram 1500 REV Specs. Up to 500 Miles Range

[UncleDave]

I just compared for a random high cost county in California (Alameda) using average gas price vs EV rate plan w/PG&E its still showing a $5,750 savings over 5 years versus the hybrid F150 and $8,750 savings versus the non-hybrids if you charge during off peak @ .26/KWH on EV rate plan. Now if you charge during peak periods @ .57/KWH the cost flips largely in favor of the ICE vehicles, I would sincerely hope someone buying an EV that charges at home would know to select the correct rate plan and charge at off peak times.

Hawaii has highest average electric rate (~.45/KWH) and it appears EV's won't ever win out on cost there even with their high gas prices. New Hampshire is next on the list at ~.31/KWH and with their low gas prices the HEV wins out but the ICE vehicles are about a wash. Moving down the list outside of these two states using average gas and electric rates the BEV wins out.

I have PGE and there is a lot of detail missing from the rate plan front page.
Namely usage tiering and delivery fees in addition to peak hour rate changes.
PG&E refers to this a "baseline"and above baseline.

EV- A aggregates your car and home - is simply a bit TINY lower rate at night but you will aggregate and tier total cost so you lose a good chunk of that to tiering.

To really save any money on a charging plan you need to go to EV-B

EV-B adds a second meter (you pay a lot to do this) to the home specifically for vehicles. Note the rate is actually a bit higher, but you dont aggregate the house into tiering.

 

[MattPersman]

Is that a joke? LOL Even at half that price it's a stretch.

You realize many 1500s with gas or diesel have been stickered 75-80 currently. I don’t see 100 a stretch considering it’s a large battery pack

 

[MattPersman]

Bingo. We've seen this play out before...also missing all the detail about how it actually takes a charge over time under load.
The lighting turned out to be uncompetitive with sedans in travel time.

Whose battery?
Whats the battery format. Very likely to be pouches.

Still - a compelling choice for some, it's not my truck but its getting closer to workable and a step beyond what we've seen from Ford.

They are building a plant with Samsung for batteries in indiana. rumored to be serviced in the field. Like test and replace cells

 

[demarpaint]

You realize many 1500s with gas or diesel have been stickered 75-80 currently. I don’t see 100 a stretch considering it’s a large battery pack

I do, but another $20-25K would make it even more of a no go for me. Then being a first year unpaid beta tester ironing out potential bugs, no thanks.

 

[UncleDave]

They are building a plant with Samsung for batteries in indiana. rumored to be serviced in the field. Like test and replace cells

Serviceability almost invariably means pouch - not my favorite out of the gate especially in something that has the potential to be so heavily discharged then charged as quickly as possible for a long duration. A cylindrical may not be as repairable but is less likely to need to repair to begin with.

 

[The Critic]

I just compared for a random high cost county in California (Alameda) using average gas price vs EV rate plan w/PG&E its still showing a $5,750 savings over 5 years versus the hybrid F150 and $8,750 savings versus the non-hybrids if you charge during off peak @ .26/KWH on EV rate plan. Now if you charge during peak periods @ .57/KWH the cost flips largely in favor of the ICE vehicles, I would sincerely hope someone buying an EV that charges at home would know to select the correct rate plan and charge at off peak times.

https://www.pge.com/en_US/residenti...cle-base-plan/electric-vehicle-base-plan.page

26 cents is pretty enticing, but this raises two other issues:

1) With these larger batteries, getting a full charge (10-90%) within an 8 hr time frame will no longer be realistic with a "typical" 32-48A L2 charger. The Ford lightening charger requires 80A - most houses with 200A service will not support this. I realize that most daily use will not require a this amount of charging, but busy lifestyles will get close to this - especially in winter months where the range is often reduced by 30-40%.

2) For those of us with solar and WFH, I am curious how the reduced cost of charging (at night) really pencils out. We obviously do not generate at night, so I'm curious if charging during the day may still be a more viable option.

 

[UncleDave]

https://www.pge.com/en_US/residenti...cle-base-plan/electric-vehicle-base-plan.page

26 cents is pretty enticing, but this raises two other issues:

1) With these larger batteries, getting a full charge (10-90%) within an 8 hr time frame will no longer be realistic with a "typical" 32-48A L2 charger. The Ford lightening charger requires 80A - most houses with 200A service will not support this. I realize that most daily use will not require a this amount of charging, but busy lifestyles will get close to this - especially in winter months where the range is often reduced by 30-40%.

2) For those of us with solar and WFH, I am curious how the reduced cost of charging (at night) really pencils out. We obviously do not generate at night, so I'm curious if charging during the day may still be a more viable option.

Solar credits work differently depending on your contract. Clearly one doesn't generate at night.

Typically it works on a credit basis.

If you produce enough energy to net export, those KWH are "banked" at whatever price your provider sets.

If your contract does not allow credit offset then you may wish to charge during productive hours.

 

[The Critic]

Solar credits work differently depending on your contract. Clearly one doesn't generate at night.

Typically it works on a credit basis.

If you produce enough energy to net export, those KWH are "banked" at whatever price your provider sets.

If your contract does not allow credit offset then you may wish to charge during productive hours.

In full transparency, my solar system came with the house and I had no control over its presence or its continual cost, so it isn't something that I have bothered to pay much attention to.

Based on this bill, it looks like my excess production is banked?

 

[UncleDave]

In full transparency, my solar system came with the house and I had no control over its presence or its continual cost, so it isn't something that I have bothered to pay much attention to.

Based on this bill, it looks like my excess production is banked?

View attachment 149731

Correct nem 2 is banked.

Looks like on average you bank about 19KWH a day or 133KWH a week.
Of course thats the average and Summer/ winter and your own use effects that.

 

[The Critic]

Correct nem 2 is banked.

Looks like on average you bank about 19KWH a day or 133KWH a week.
Of course thats the average and Summer/ winter and you own use effects that.

Thanks! This year (10/2022-now) has been brutal - I'm sure the storms had a lot to do with it:

Comparison to last year:

Anyway, you raised a valid point - one must carefully analyze their charging situation to see what makes sense. The savings with EV Trucks can be far greater if one lives in an area where energy costs are significantly lower.

 

[UncleDave]

Thanks! This year (10/2022-now) has been brutal - I'm sure the storms had a lot to do with it:
View attachment 149732

Comparison to last year:

View attachment 149734
Anyway, you raised a valid point - one must carefully analyze their charging situation to see what makes sense. The savings with EV Trucks can be far greater if one lives in an area where energy costs are significantly lower.

Big swing YTY for everyone in cali with solar, but you are clearly well ahead of where you'd be without it.

Advertised savings should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

 

[Cujet]

It is not unusual for pickup trucks to see about 1.5 to 1.6 miles per KWh of battery at modern highway speeds. Maybe as high as 1.8 miles if kept below 70mph.

229 x 0.9 (draw the battery down to 10%) and we get 206KWh useable. Highway range will be 329 miles.

 

[UncleDave]

It is not unusual for pickup trucks to see about 1.5 to 1.6 miles per KWh of battery at modern highway speeds. Maybe as high as 1.8 miles if kept below 70mph.

229 x 0.9 (draw the battery down to 10%) and we get 206KWh useable. Highway range will be 329 miles.

Prob more like 80% of 229 or 183 -then 90% of that or 164 X 1.8 or 296.

Ive seen claims the lightning can get 2.3 at 70 but cant recall the source.

 

[E365]

Some 70 MPH range tests

Hummer Edition 1 Pickup: 1.6 miles/kWh (35” M/T tires)

Rivian R1T: 2.06 miles/kWh (optional Off-Road tires and high winds)

Lightning: 2.12 miles/kWh

Lightning: 2.1 miles/kWh

 

[Cujet]

Some 70 MPH range tests

Hummer Edition 1 Pickup: 1.6 miles/kWh (35” M/T tires)

Rivian R1T: 2.06 miles/kWh (optional Off-Road tires and high winds)

Lightning: 2.12 miles/kWh

Lightning: 2.1 miles/kWh

A few points. The 230KWH battery is stupidly heavy. It is about double the weight of the mid-sized Rivian's battery. Consumer owned Lightnings achieve no more than 2 miles per KWh. And for those of us who live near open highways, during the daytime, 70MPH is right lane slow and NOT where you want to be. Even 75 is often too slow. I've seen traffic moving at 90 at times.

A good number of tests are done on a highway "loop" where the vehicle gets off the exit sits behind traffic lights and turns around. This skews the results somewhat and lowers the average speed traveled markedly.

The fact is, the Lightning is under 2 miles (1.9) per KWh in real conditions, kept to 70 and below, with real users, with no load.

 

[E365]

A few points. The 230KWH battery is stupidly heavy. It is about double the weight of the mid-sized Rivian's battery. Consumer owned Lightnings achieve no more than 2 miles per KWh. And for those of us who live near open highways, during the daytime, 70MPH is right lane slow and NOT where you want to be. Even 75 is often too slow. I've seen traffic moving at 90 at times.

A good number of tests are done on a highway "loop" where the vehicle gets off the exit sits behind traffic lights and turns around. This skews the results somewhat and lowers the average speed traveled markedly.

The fact is, the Lightning is under 2 miles (1.9) per KWh in real conditions, kept to 70 and below, with real users, with no load.

You mention these factors a lot, but I’ve never seen you post the one, perfect range test that fits every situation. There is none.

These are journalists with maybe one day in a press car to do a repeatable range test. It’s not realistic to run 1,000 tests at various speeds, grades, loads, weather conditions, etc. to suit every reader.

 

[Cujet]

You mention these factors a lot, but I’ve never seen you post the one, perfect range test that fits every situation. There is none.

Man is that ever true. Conditions change seasonally, and when sports events happen, and accidents, and whenever the highway gods look favorably on the poor motorist EV's are more sensitive to things like cold and speed than conventional vehicles are.

In agreement with you, I would say the best range test is the actual drive on the route "one" is likely to drive. And not some YouTube, EV agenda-driven inadequate test that leads people to believe the impossible. My point is simply that EV's are not the ideal choice for long, time saving highway trips.

However, I can tell the good readers here that my 2018 F150 4x4 SuperCrew can (barring a disaster) always go 650 miles on it's 36 gal tank with a very healthy reserve, regardless of conditions, temperature, with the AC blasting at speeds I won't mention. Every time I stop at the same location in North Carolina. This being my 26th year doing these trips, I'm pretty well versed on it.

The 1253 mile trip requires 1 fuel stop mid point with the 2018. The 2011 requires 2 fuel stops. It has a smaller tank and worse MPG. The 2009 requires 4 fuel stops, getting 12MPG and 36 gallons.

 

[The Critic]

Man is that ever true. Conditions change seasonally, and when sports events happen, and accidents, and whenever the highway gods look favorably on the poor motorist EV's are more sensitive to things like cold and speed than conventional vehicles are.

In agreement with you, I would say the best range test is the actual drive on the route "one" is likely to drive. And not some EV agenda-driven inadequate test that leads people to believe the impossible.

However, I can tell the good readers here that my 2018 F150 4x4 SuperCrew can (barring a disaster) always go 650 miles on it's 36 gal tank with a very healthy reserve, regardless of conditions, temperature, with the AC blasting at speeds I won't mention. Every time I stop at the same location in North Carolina. This being my 26th year doing this, I'm pretty well versed on it.

The 1253 mile trip requires 1 fuel stop mid point with the 2018. The 2011 requires 2 fuel stops. It has a smaller tank and worse MPG. The 2009 requires 4 fuel stops, getting 12MPG and 36 gallons.

With all due respect, your usage is not representative of the "average North American driver." The amount of capability (and range) that you are seeking is far from the norm.

 

[Cujet]

With all due respect, your usage is not representative of the "average North American driver." The amount of capability (and range) that you are seeking is far from the norm.

That's not lost on me. But as a highway driver, when people ask about EV's and long highway trips, I do have a few answers, having done it a few times now.

 

[Torrid]

You realize many 1500s with gas or diesel have been stickered 75-80 currently. I don’t see 100 a stretch considering it’s a large battery pack

I don't disagree with you, but I feel like this is a horrible start for an EV platform. A truck is the last thing that should be an EV. Range suffers by weight and unladen it'll take twice the battery to move as far as a Model 3, Chevy Bolt, or otherwise. I feel like someone needs to make a proper small EV hatch with serious performance, something Tesla is more than capable of doing, and I can haul all the stuff I can in my GTI and it'll be practical for the run to Home Depot and still super efficient on my commute.