Did French owned Mopar come up with a silly idea? 2025 Ramcharger

Northcoast300h

Northcoast300h

Active Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
291
Reaction score
261
Location
Cleveland, OH
Mopar approved manufacturing, available September 2024. Nice looking electric truck but it still has its 3.6L engine. It's not a hybrid. The engine is not connected to the drivetrain, meaning the engine is just a really big generator....huh?...why?

Using the engine generator to recharge is very inefficient. Plus the engine will still need oil changes, belts, etc.

Also RAM is coming out with the heaviest battery which makes it the heaviest 1500 ever in the 1500REV. 7600-8000lbs $70,000 - $100,000.

Is Ram trying to build the most inefficient, most expensive to maintain, environmentally worse truck ever? Rube Goldberg would be proud!

FP023_005RM1-1536x864.jpg
 
Last edited:
That is a type of hybrid. It's called a series hybrid, kind of like a diesel-electric locomotive. The Fisker Karma and Chevy Volt* were series hybrids also. *GM didn't want people to know this, but in certain highway driving conditions the gas engine in the Volt would be mechanically coupled to the drivetrain. Otherwise, it was a series hybrid.

For people complaining that the Ford Lightning is useless for actually doing "truck stuff", this is one solution. Most of the time you'd plug it in to charge, but for longer trips or heavier loads, the gas engine extends your range without needing to stop to recharge. And from what I've read, the fully-electric only range is 145mi, not 500mi. The wording in some of their advertising is a bit sneaky, but the longer stated range includes the time when the genset has kicked-in to recharge the battery while driving.
 
Just plain ol' NO for me. This truck will be a warranty nightmare, plus impossible to afford to fix once it's out of warranty.
 
So on charge only it will go 140-150 miles before the 3.6 kicks in and starts charging or powering the motors. So 540-550 miles with the 3.6 running. With a 27gal tank, that means the 3.6 gets 20.3mpg. That's really nothing to write home about. Now if they put a small turbo diesel in it, that could be a different story.
Even if the 3.6 was running the entire time over the suggested 690 miles it would only be getting 25.5mpg.
My 2020 6.7 F250 gets that and it's a 6900lbs brick.
 
Don't let Chrysler / Stenallis Fool you, A new hemi is coming... This woke $#!+ is going down the toilet so fast. That new Electric Charger has a Transmission TUNNEL!
 
They can keep it, and all electric vehicles. Every time I see a tesla burning away, knowing that 6,000 gallons of water is used to put that thing out, I wonder where our minds are? We're at the end of a drought here in the west, where we've been asked to not water our lawns or wash our cars, but 6,000 gallons to put out a car that is supposed to "save the earth?" What are people thinking??
 
Daly said:
So on charge only it will go 140-150 miles before the 3.6 kicks in and starts charging or powering the motors. So 540-550 miles with the 3.6 running. With a 27gal tank, that means the 3.6 gets 20.3mpg. That's really nothing to write home about. Now if they put a small turbo diesel in it, that could be a different story.
Even if the 3.6 was running the entire time over the suggested 690 miles it would only be getting 25.5mpg.
My 2020 6.7 F250 gets that and it's a 6900lbs brick.
Click to expand...
Thanks Daly for the response. I'm not disagreeing since I'm not an electrical engineer and there might be some new alien engineering I don't know about, but I am confused. Is this what Ram is saying? If so, It doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
Mike66Chryslers said:
That is a type of hybrid. It's called a series hybrid, kind of like a diesel-electric locomotive. The Fisker Karma and Chevy Volt* were series hybrids also. *GM didn't want people to know this, but in certain highway driving conditions the gas engine in the Volt would be mechanically coupled to the drivetrain. Otherwise, it was a series hybrid.

For people complaining that the Ford Lightning is useless for actually doing "truck stuff", this is one solution. Most of the time you'd plug it in to charge, but for longer trips or heavier loads, the gas engine extends your range without needing to stop to recharge. And from what I've read, the fully-electric only range is 145mi, not 500mi. The wording in some of their advertising is a bit sneaky, but the longer stated range includes the time when the genset has kicked-in to recharge the battery while driving.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. I didn't know the Fisker had an engine. With all of Fiskers engineering problems, I would think RAM would steer clear of series hybrids. As you stated the Chevy Volt isn't a series hybrid.

Series hybrids work great in massive ships and trains where its the only option to get those monsters moving. In cars, trucks, there are much better options already available.

I wished Elon invested in Hydrogen Hydride instead of batteries. HH doesn't explode or even catch fire under 180F. Its pumped in cold, then a heat plug prior to each cylinder heats it up to 190F. Theres videos of people fire guns and grenades at HH tanks. Ruptured tanks just steam. Its the safest, cheapest, cleanest, most abundant energy out there. Anyone can make HH in their garage and yeah, if done wrong and HH gets over 180F, it could blow up your house but its much safer than gasoline. HH does cost a little more than plugging in, but still less by about half than fuel. Toyota Mirai is only HH car I know of for sale in USA with very fuel Hydrogen stations. Performance kind of sucks, but so did electric before 2008.
 
I am interested in keeping up with this as the information keeps coming. I found a good article on this a few days ago. A 200 mile hybrid or full electric doesn’t get my attention. A 600 mile range is interesting. The thing about a generator is that it is running at a constant speed and a preset load based on the power generation needs. I am wondering if the range is due to the fuel capacity, or is it due to the electric demand consuming power faster than the generator can re-charge. I really don’t care if some of you would never purchase one on principal, but I am very interested in the technology changes that some of these systems are starting to drive.
 
Northcoast300h said:
Thanks Daly for the response. I'm not disagreeing since I'm not an electrical engineer and there might be some new alien engineering I don't know about, but I am confused. Is this what Ram is saying? If so, It doesn't make sense.

150 miles? With the huge 229kwh battery, on charge only, the battery should go at least 400 miles by itself. (1kwh = at least 2 miles for a heavy truck x 1/10 energy expelled for non drivetrain options). So where is the huge loss coming from?

20.3 mpg? If the engine was connected to the wheels, I'd agree, but in this truck, the engine never sends power to the wheels, its only connected to the battery. There's a considerable loss of energy due to the conversion from fuel to electric battery to the wheels, so I'd love to know how RAM achieved this.

The engine can recharge the battery faster than the power needed? No one else has been able to achieve this without frying and blowing up the batteries, so I wonder how RAM does this? At 60mph, the 3.6L would have to put out 30kw which should toast the batteries. Lithium/Cobalt batteries like a "slow" charge. Anything over 10kw will lower the batteries life.

6900lbs for your little Ford? Thats a lightweight. The RAM 1500 REV is 7600lbs with fully loaded models around 8000lbs. This RAM will make lots of road ruts like semis makes....hee, hee!
Click to expand...
So I think you are getting stats mixed up.
The RAM REV is 100% electric, no 3.6l included.
The Ramcharger is a gas/electric hybrid.
The RAM REV has two battery options a 168kWh (350mile range) battery and a 229kWh (500mile range) battery.
The Ramcharger has a 92kWh battery and a 3.6 attached to a 130kWh generator. Combined the Ramcharger is estimated to get a 690mile range.
The Ramcharger is the vehicle I was referring two, I assumed you were talking about it when you mentioned the 3.6l.
As for the MPG of the 3.6l I stated that's an easy calculation. And if 1kWh = 2 miles then the 3.6l gets worse MpG then I originally stated.
The Ramcharger has an estimated 690 miles of range, less 184 miles from the 92kWh battery = 508 miles. It has a 27 gal tank. 508/27=18.8 MPG
 
Daly said:
So I think you are getting stats mixed up.
The RAM REV is 100% electric, no 3.6l included.
The Ramcharger is a gas/electric hybrid.
The RAM REV has two battery options a 168kWh (350mile range) battery and a 229kWh (500mile range) battery.
The Ramcharger has a 92kWh battery and a 3.6 attached to a 130kWh generator. Combined the Ramcharger is estimated to get a 690mile range.
The Ramcharger is the vehicle I was referring two, I assumed you were talking about it when you mentioned the 3.6l.
As for the MPG of the 3.6l I stated that's an easy calculation. And if 1kWh = 2 miles then the 3.6l gets worse MpG then I originally stated.
The Ramcharger has an estimated 690 miles of range, less 184 miles from the 92kWh battery = 508 miles. It has a 27 gal tank. 508/27=18.8 MPG
Click to expand...
The mileage calculation is assuming that it is using the full 27 gallons. Is the range limited to the power used where the batteries discharge faster than the charging input while driving or does it use all 27 gallons? It will be interesting to see the test data.
 
HWYCRZR said:
The mileage calculation is assuming that it is using the full 27 gallons. Is the range limited to the power used where the batteries discharge faster than the charging input while driving or does it use all 27 gallons? It will be interesting to see the test data.
Click to expand...
That's the thing, they aren't available to the consumers yet. These are estimated numbers. Will it go 690 miles, or will the average be closer to 500 miles or 800 miles. And even at 25 gals it's still only 20mpg, there are plenty of fullsize trucks on the market get better than that now.
I'm thinking, much like every other vehicle sold, it's range/MPG will be less in real world conditions.
 
Daly said:
So I think you are getting stats mixed up.
The RAM REV is 100% electric, no 3.6l included.
The Ramcharger is a gas/electric hybrid.
The RAM REV has two battery options a 168kWh (350mile range) battery and a 229kWh (500mile range) battery.
The Ramcharger has a 92kWh battery and a 3.6 attached to a 130kWh generator. Combined the Ramcharger is estimated to get a 690mile range.
The Ramcharger is the vehicle I was referring two, I assumed you were talking about it when you mentioned the 3.6l.
As for the MPG of the 3.6l I stated that's an easy calculation. And if 1kWh = 2 miles then the 3.6l gets worse MpG then I originally stated.
The Ramcharger has an estimated 690 miles of range, less 184 miles from the 92kWh battery = 508 miles. It has a 27 gal tank. 508/27=18.8 MPG
Click to expand...
Oops, you're right. Its the Ramcharger I'm thinking about. Thanks for the correction. I updated my postings so people don't get confused.
 
Last edited:
I would love to see the manufacturing costs between the different options for the power plant. I am mixing the REV and the Ramcharger scenarios.
If the REV 168KWh battery and power plant is $X.
I would imagine the 229kWh option is $X times 1.5. (Not up to speed on mfg costs of batteries by kWh so don’t know if it is 50% higher or 25% higher)
Now for the Ramcharger. If 92kHw battery cost is $X times 0.5 (Half of 168KWh system) plus the generator and 3.6l engine. I wonder the difference in costs for the power plant plus battery differences between the 229kWh system and the Ramcharger system. It’s not cheap to have an engine and a big battery pack.
 
Daly said:
So I think you are getting stats mixed up.
The RAM REV is 100% electric, no 3.6l included.
The Ramcharger is a gas/electric hybrid.
The RAM REV has two battery options a 168kWh (350mile range) battery and a 229kWh (500mile range) battery.
The Ramcharger has a 92kWh battery and a 3.6 attached to a 130kWh generator. Combined the Ramcharger is estimated to get a 690mile range.
The Ramcharger is the vehicle I was referring two, I assumed you were talking about it when you mentioned the 3.6l.
As for the MPG of the 3.6l I stated that's an easy calculation. And if 1kWh = 2 miles then the 3.6l gets worse MpG then I originally stated.
The Ramcharger has an estimated 690 miles of range, less 184 miles from the 92kWh battery = 508 miles. It has a 27 gal tank. 508/27=18.8 MPG
Click to expand...
Can the Ramcharger charge faster than the battery is putting out the power? I'm pretty sure that's impossible with lithium/cobalt batteries. I just have a bad feeling that the battery will start frying from overcharging or use more energy than the generator can charge. Then the driver will have to pull over and let the 3.6L charge up the battery, especially when the vehicle gets old.

2 miles per kwh is if you drive like a granny (184 miles/92kwh). Accelerating, high speeds, using AC on high will be more like 140 miles.

Amazing RAM thinks the 130kwh generator won't harm the 92kwh battery. Lithium doesn't like being charged while being used, especially at high killawatts. They usually explode.

If RAM info is true, then my question is why not just hook up the 130kwh generator to the drivetrain and get rid of the 92kwh batteries? You'll have more power.

This truck is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Just some more useless data. Is 5.7 V8 cheaper than EV truck? Please check my math:

1kwh = 2 miles for heavy trucks.
Avg home kwh in USA costs $0.15.
Avg public kwh fast charge cost $0.40,
This 3.6L kwh generator costs $0.19.

(130kwh Ramcharger generator/92kwh battery) takes approx 45 minutes to recharge full from dead battery. However, most generators run at 50% to save fuel. Per google, avg fuel used at 50% is 8 gallons X avg fuel in USA $3.50 per gallon/184 miles = $0.15, however in reality range is probably 150, so $0.19 is realistic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2024 Ram 1500 with 5.7 V8 avg 22mpg. Fuel is $3.50 gallon, sooooooooo:

Avg fuel to kwh equivalent = $0.318 ($3.50/22) X 2 miles

When you add maintenance, oil, belts, fluid for 3.6L and batteries, maint for V8 is probably a little less, so lets say $0.30

Fuel $0.25 - EV home change $0.15 = $0.15 in favor of EV
Fuel $0.25 - EV public charge $0.40 = $0.10 in favor of fuel
Fuel $0.25 - EV generator $0.19 = $.11 in favor of EV

The Ramcharger 1500 is est price $65,000.

The RAM 1500 V8 est price is $42,000

Time it will take to equal fuel (EV home charge) = $23,000/$3.65 X 22mpg = 138,630 miles

Time it will take to equal fuel (EV public charge) = $23,000 x $0.10 =$25,300 saved, so never

Time it will take to equal fuel (EV generator) = $23,000/$3.61 X 22mpg = 140,166 miles

Answer: I think most new truck buyers trade in their trucks by 140,000 so they're not saving any money.
 
Last edited:
This thing is going to be well north of $100K. Even for a gasser or a Diesel pickup, that amount is insane, period. The tech is indeed "fascinating", but for Joe Bagodonuts on the street, it makes so little sense to throw that kind of money at a vehicle that will be obsolete by the time the warranty expires. And like most vehicles, the invisible timer that makes everything break six miles (or six minutes!) after the warranty expires, it'll be one very expensive bit of yard art.

Sorry, but my confidence level in all this black magic is below "low". Your confidence level may vary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top