Ford Transit USA Forum banner
61 - 80 of 111 Posts

Registered
Joined
75 Posts
Ford says 126 mile range on the LOW ROOF.馃槀馃槀馃槀馃槀. Since these vans are primarily used for RV's and tradesmen I consider this to be a total joke. Elsewhere on their site it said on a 120 v outlet you get 1.7 miles per hour of charging. On a 240 outlet you get a WHOPPING 10 miles per hour of charging so you won't even get a full charge overnight (if you even have a 240 v outlet). This is another total joke. Not to mention it has less HP than my 3.7 NA engine. Another total joke. No way, no how for me.
 

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
Ford says 126 mile range on the LOW ROOF.馃槀馃槀馃槀馃槀. Since these vans are primarily used for RV's and tradesmen I consider this to be a total joke. Elsewhere on their site it said on a 120 v outlet you get 1.7 miles per hour of charging. On a 240 outlet you get a WHOPPING 10 miles per hour of charging so you won't even get a full charge overnight (if you even have a 240 v outlet). This is another total joke. Not to mention it has less HP than my 3.7 NA engine. Another total joke. No way, no how for me.
Transits are primarily used as in-town delivery vehicles, about 95% of transits sold are to fleets. I doubt RVs are even one half of 1% of Transits sold. And DIY RVs (aka campervans) are probably less than 1 in 1000 Transits sold. I think we get myopic because WE have vans to modify and turn into DIY RVs, so we think that's the only thing they are used for.

Thus, 126 mile range, which meets the stated range requirements of major delivery fleets, is more than enough. For that purpose. You'll see all the big EV vans will have about that much range, because they don't want to spend money making them exceed the requirements of their big customers. They'd have to charge more, so the big customers would buy from GM or Stellantis or Mercedes or whoever instead.

Tip: the eTransits are NOT for DIY RV enthusiasts. Don't even think about it. It's OK, the people and companies that want them can have them, even if it's not something that will work for you personally. And this sure won't work for me, either.

Also, horsepower and torque are two different things. Torque is the important one.

Can you link to the page that says only 10 miles per hour charge rate on 220vac? That's crazy slow. 120vac charge rate is 5-10 miles per hour on most EVs, 20-30 with 30a 220vac. BUT, I forgot about vehicle efficiency! This big giant box of a vehicle isn't going to go as many miles per Kw as a subcompact commuter car! THAT would explain the 10 miles per hour of charging on a level-2 charger (220vac, 30a). Miles per Gallon and Miles per Kilowatt are the same comparison between vehicles for efficiency; a tiny car that gets 45mpg vs a giant SUV that gets 8. Same thing is going to happen with electricity, which is measured in kilowatt hours, Kwh, instead of gallons.

At 30amps with 220vac, you can dump about 6.5 kilowatts into it per hour. If the thing is so big and inefficient that it uses 1 kilowatt per mile, then you get a charge rate of 6.5 miles per hour! I think these fleet vehicles will probably have level-3 charging at the distribution center, which can put in 2-4x as much juice per hour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gggGary

Registered
Joined
75 Posts
Transits are primarily used as in-town delivery vehicles, about 95% of transits sold are to fleets. I doubt RVs are even one half of 1% of Transits sold. And DIY RVs (aka campervans) are probably less than 1 in 1000 Transits sold. I think we get myopic because WE have vans to modify and turn into DIY RVs, so we think that's the only thing they are used for.

Thus, 126 mile range, which meets the stated range requirements of major delivery fleets, is more than enough. For that purpose. You'll see all the big EV vans will have about that much range, because they don't want to spend money making them exceed the requirements of their big customers. They'd have to charge more, so the big customers would buy from GM or Stellantis or Mercedes or whoever instead.

Tip: the eTransits are NOT for DIY RV enthusiasts. Don't even think about it. It's OK, the people and companies that want them can have them, even if it's not something that will work for you personally. And this sure won't work for me, either.

Also, horsepower and torque are two different things. Torque is the important one.

Can you link to the page that says only 10 miles per hour charge rate on 220vac? That's crazy slow. 120vac charge rate is 5-10 miles per hour on most EVs, 20-30 with 30a 220vac. BUT, I forgot about vehicle efficiency! This big giant box of a vehicle isn't going to go as many miles per Kw as a subcompact commuter car! THAT would explain the 10 miles per hour of charging on a level-2 charger (220vac, 30a). Miles per Gallon and Miles per Kilowatt are the same comparison between vehicles for efficiency; a tiny car that gets 45mpg vs a giant SUV that gets 8. Same thing is going to happen with electricity, which is measured in kilowatt hours, Kwh, instead of gallons.

At 30amps with 220vac, you can dump about 6.5 kilowatts into it per hour. If the thing is so big and inefficient that it uses 1 kilowatt per mile, then you get a charge rate of 6.5 miles per hour! I think these fleet vehicles will probably have level-3 charging at the distribution center, which can put in 2-4x as much juice per hour.
I didn't research about what proportion of the Transits are used for around town deliveries so you could be right on that, I don't know. But fleet or not, they have to drive somewhere don't they? I live in a rural area of NJ and most of the Transit's I see have lettering on them for the trades or as limo's as does mine. Nor have I seen UPS or Fed Ex using them here, but that's just here in my small part of the world. If they are using them for delivery, I'd like to see what the already dismal range drops to in constant stop and go. I do recall seeing that at a Level 2 charging station it still takes 8 hours to charge, so unless these fleets have access to something faster than that, I still can't see how it would work for them.

There are a lot of guys on this forum who talk about using their Transits as RVs so for those guys I the EV Transit (as it is now) would still be a total joke. Same for us tradesmen.

RE HP vs torque, I am aware of the difference, but bottom line HP is the important number since it's your torque x rpms. All things being equal, HP is the important number except off the line in some cases. But again, even so, I think the website said it has 315 ft/lbs of torque - that's about 100 less than the 3.5, and not much more than my 3.7, so not impressive at all.

Where is the benefit in the EV Transit? I don't see any. Having said that, I applaud anyone for buying one if it suits their needs and they like it.

I don't have a link to the info I got right now and have to run to work (I use my Transit for painting馃榿) but both numbers came from Ford ads and/or website.
 

Registered
Joined
5,840 Posts
"During the design process, much consideration was given to determining the right range and battery capacity for the E-Transit. 鈥淥ne of the benefits of having north of 40% market share is that we were able to look at 30 million miles of telematics analysis for work vans. In the U.S., the average commercial van actually drives only 74 miles on the average day,鈥 said Yaro Hetman, global marketing director, electric trucks, vans, and commercial vehicles for Ford. 鈥淥f course, we also recognize that there are days when these range needs are higher. And the customers will also need to adjust for factors such as cold weather and payload. We took all this into account when designing E-Transit. It was created with the targeted estimated range of up to 126 miles.鈥 - Automotive fleet.com

The telematics data most certainly came from the large fleet customers who bought the majority of the initial run of 10,000(?). The battery was most certainly sized to have the highest ROI for that initial (large scale test) production.
Subsequent production will be based on the sh!t ton of data collected from that fleet and the necessary range profile for additional vehicles. IIRC the E-Transit is required to be "connected" to operate so Ford will even have the data from the smaller users. They are also obtaining a trove trove of data from the folks that are willing to enable FordPass (to get "free" shiny objects)

I would suspect over time (and as battery and fossil fuel costs change) there will be a variety of capacities produced.
Data driven development and marketing for a commodity work tool seems like a good approach to me.
 

Registered
Joined
997 Posts
These e-vans, Transit, Promaster and Sprinter are designed for the European market, access to the polluted city centers in Europe, the added fees and restrictions gave birth to the e-LCV market. Read about what London has done.

Enter American companies jumping on the band wagon, reshaped and tweak the van for the NA market.

Just an opinion.

If you want to do business in London upgrade or leave.
Product Azure Rectangle Font Screenshot


Font Screenshot Rectangle Number Circle
 

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
The obvious advantage, other than that nice squishy feeling that comes from helping to save the world from an oily Armageddon is much lower operating costs.
Maintenance and repair savings alone make them more valuable to fleets than ICE drivetrains. On top of that, electricity is cheaper per mile than gas/diesel by a long shot. Biznis is all about making money, so these will soon be the dominant platform for in-town delivery fleets. Since almost 90% of the population lives in town, it's only the people out in the country who will not be serviced by an EV delivery van.

Hey, this brings up a thing; when Amazon et al is finally able to get eVans in the amounts they want (all production is currently sold out, with a huge waiting list), what's going to happen to those hundred thousand+ ICE delivery vans that are being replaced? Finally a glut of used cargo vans on the market? I heard UPS does NOT sell their used vehicles, but scraps or parts them out, that may change.

Disclaimer: Yes, I advocate for EVs for a variety of reasons, however, an eVan would NOT work for my personal needs. Yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gggGary

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
I think Amazon vans get totaled before the warranty period is up.

I would think that e-van would be idea for the wealthier houseless van dwellers who stay around cities.
lolz for the Amazon vans getting totaled!
There's a big Amazon hub near me, and they have rented out the old Sears location for their repair/maintenance shop. Literally 50-100 vans parked in that lot, 100% having body damage above 6'. Some of it severe.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: gggGary

Registered
Joined
1,414 Posts
Nor have I seen UPS or Fed Ex using them here, but that's just here in my small part of the world. If they are using them for delivery, I'd like to see what the already dismal range drops to in constant stop and go.
??? "stop and go" is where EV's shine. Most of the energy wasted by heating up the brakes in a gas vehicle instead is captured by the electric motor. And then when stopped, "idling" uses no energy.
 

Registered
Joined
112 Posts
I have had a Ford plug-in hybrid since 2013. I am hoping for a plug-in Transit to be added to the lineup sometime. For those who think an Egoboost is fun to drive, try an electric motor, whether all electric of a PHEV (Plug-In). The instant torque is awesome. Less emissions is less emissions you and I breathe. Last I knew, hospitals don't use burned dinosaur and fern exhaust for patients. Probably a good reason for that but I don't know.

BTW. since 2013 I have spent zero dollars and zero cents on maintenance for the electric motor.
 

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
I have had a Ford plug-in hybrid since 2013. I am hoping for a plug-in Transit to be added to the lineup sometime. For those who think an Egoboost is fun to drive, try an electric motor, whether all electric of a PHEV (Plug-In). The instant torque is awesome. Less emissions is less emissions you and I breathe. Last I knew, hospitals don't use burned dinosaur and fern exhaust for patients. Probably a good reason for that but I don't know.

BTW. since 2013 I have spent zero dollars and zero cents on maintenance for the electric motor.
Coming home from my run this afternoon, getting on the onramp to the freeway some chuffing backfiring "tuned" Charger or whatever right behind me (like 5' behind me) was doing that a$$ thing where they swerve from side to side pretending like they're going to pass on the shoulder (but never do) to let you know they think you're going too slow for them. I was in the Fiat 500e, so I floored it and they got real tiny in the rearview real fast. I leveled off at highway speed so I could merge (about 60 at the time). Of course once they caught up on the freeway, they needed to do a lot of engine revving and backfiring as they passed in another lane, just to let me know their dominance. And this is just a little subcompact EV not made for acceleration. Those 2-3 second 0-60 cars must be nuts!

The trophy fake-wife is at the house on the Big Island for a couple months, so I've been driving her Fiat when I can; to avoid the $5.50-6.00 gas in the Transit. I've only burned up half a tank in the last two weeks, and charged the Fiat once. The more I drive it, the more I like it. I still think it's claustrophobic inside, and you can't see out very well (poor design), but it's fine once you get used to it, and adjust the mirrors. Plenty of room for groceries, even a trip to Costco. At the time, she spent $8k on it used with 25k miles. There were a couple others with less miles for $1000 less, but this one was at a lot nearby, and she liked this color more than the others, a major consideration for some people 馃槖. Now they're all about $10-18k, same year, more miles. But, my van is worth more now than when I bought it, and it now has 105k instead of 80, so...
 

Registered
Joined
1,549 Posts
Last I knew, hospitals don't use burned dinosaur and fern exhaust for patients. Probably a good reason for that but I don't know.
Funny yet true remark, which reminds me of the similarities between people and internal combustion engines. Even when a patient inhales pure oxygen, they exhale carbon dioxide and water vapor just like ICE vehicles.

Combining fuel (hydrocarbons or carbohydrates) with oxygen for energy, both which produce CO2 and H2O, is a very natural process. Regardless, hospitals wouldn鈥檛 use human exhaust any more than dinosaur exhaust for patients.

Not sure what that says about need for electrification of humans versus vehicles? 馃榾
 

Registered
2016, MR, 130"
Joined
1,332 Posts
Oops
Oh, c'mon. How many gas powered vehicles have ever caught fire? Back when I was a firefighter I have been to plenty. Sure there are some different fire hazards and extinguishment issues with EVs. No doubt that improvements need to be made. Same applies to off grid structure fires. But not a great argument against EVs in general.
 
  • Like
Reactions: coolcamp

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
Oh, c'mon. How many gas powered vehicles have ever caught fire? Back when I was a firefighter I have been to plenty. Sure there are some different fire hazards and extinguishment issues with EVs. No doubt that improvements need to be made. Same applies to off grid structure fires. But not a great argument against EVs in general.
fake news! No gasoline powered vehicle has ever caught fire, only EVs catch on fire, because it's a global conspiracy!

I like the DATA that shows per million miles driven, gas/diesel vehicles catch on fire in an accident eleven times more often that EVs. That data must have been presented by the reptilian humanoids from the hollow earth (which is also flat, btw). I think every single time an EV catches on fire in an accident, it makes the headlines, unlike when a gas powered vehicles catches on fire (ho-hum). It's like that reporting bias about SUVs; every time an SUV hits a pedestrian, it's pointed out and makes headlines. When a compact car or sedan hits a pedestrian, it rarely makes the news, and often the type of vehicle is not mentioned.
 

Registered
Joined
5,840 Posts
When airplanes crash and hundreds of people die it's huge news (trains, buses, ferries too).

Humans are not particularly good a evaluating risk to their well being in the modern word.
The brain is still hardwired strongly towards intuition over rationalization of available data.
Add to that, the fact many of the pertinent statistical concepts are not easily understood by laymen.


Organism Font Circle Map Diagram
 

Registered
Joined
1,549 Posts
fake news! No gasoline powered vehicle has ever caught fire, only EVs catch on fire, because it's a global conspiracy!

I like the DATA that shows per million miles driven, gas/diesel vehicles catch on fire in an accident eleven times more often that EVs. That data must have been presented by the reptilian humanoids from the hollow earth (which is also flat, btw). I think every single time an EV catches on fire in an accident, it makes the headlines, unlike when a gas powered vehicles catches on fire (ho-hum). It's like that reporting bias about SUVs; every time an SUV hits a pedestrian, it's pointed out and makes headlines. When a compact car or sedan hits a pedestrian, it rarely makes the news, and often the type of vehicle is not mentioned.
Respectfully, that data, even if correct, isn鈥檛 that meaningful to me. How many cars catch on fire in an accident only implies a material loss which is likely covered by insurance anyway.

What is important to me, and should be to others, is how many people are killed or badly injured during the subsequent fire; which isn鈥檛 necessarily proportional to number of events. I have no idea what that number is, but could not care less about the vehicles themselves relative to human lives.

I would guess (pure speculation on my part since I have not seen data) that fatalities due to fires is higher per event for electric cars than for gasoline or diesel. Modern cars with protected fuel tanks (unlike Pintos and Mustangs of the past) when they catch fire is relatively slow at first, often giving time for passengers to get out, or someone else to get them out. I have personally seen a few vehicle fires after accidents and no one burned to death. Just saying data above is incomplete.

Another consideration that should be addressed in data is type and or location of accident (city versus highway). For now most electric car miles are driven in cities at lower average speeds. Do we know if low-speed parking lot fender benders skew data versus high-speed head-on collisions? I鈥檇 want to see apples to apples comparison.

From what I have seen in news, what probably scares people most about EV fires is that the intensity usually does not appear survivable. Once any part of battery ignites, it鈥檚 likely over unless you had already moved away from car.
 

Registered
Joined
5,840 Posts
This report has a lot of highly granular and interesting data, but it does not shed light on the EV question. https://www.nfpa.org//-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-reports/US-Fire-Problem/osvehiclefirestables.pdf

EV use and and I suspect design for both intrinsic and extrinsic battery safety are changing pretty rapidly, certainly in comparison to ICE. Add to that change, the aging of the fleet and it will be some time before there is a good understanding. Heck, look at p7 in the report. The change in fire safety in (VERY mature) ICEs in the last 40 years is stunning. And those improvement are raw counts over a period where total miles travelled has gone up. I think overall auto safety has improved even more. This is a result of both regulation and free market pressure, with the primary impetus for the latter (both?) coming from the insurance industry.

Onward.
 

Registered
Joined
9,574 Posts
Original "trains" (stage coaches on rails, pulled by horses) had a HUGE accident and death rate. Because of that. steps were taken to make them safer. I suspect anything that has a lot of accidents and deaths on initial introduction would follow that pattern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gggGary
61 - 80 of 111 Posts
Top