Winnebago’s Electric Motorhome Prototype
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
And have over $50,000 in extra change to boot.
The nicest part about having an integrated unit is the ability to navigate most road infrastructure and parking lots. There are a lot of places where it's either no fun or literally impossible to navigate with a trailer. For instance parking in any city-like environment. That includes dinky "cities" of 20k people.
My ideal setup:
* Class B - day traveling and occasional overnighting. For example, being able to pull over just about anywhere for a nap while driving.
* Small Trailer - Camping equipment, shower, beds, etc.
As someone that camps otherwise stock van with a sofa bed every type of camping system has it's advantages, disadvantages, and costs. Show me any type of camping setup and I can tell you why it's non starter for a lot of people. And perfect for others. My take about electric RV's is essentially RV's are all built on a van, truck, or bus chassis. When those become available with enough range you'll see RV's built on them as a standard option.
I also am "full time" nomadic during the summer months, so if I want to stop in someplace specific I do it on a travel day in between campsites.
I have a class-b sprinter RV (4x4). It wasn't cheap and diesel isn't particularly cheap either. However, I can camp a number of places that would be next to impossible with the setup you mention. I will grant you, some of the places I am thinking aren't the ones you would be taking a winnebego...
On another note, RV parks, which you would probably be camping at in order to have access to a power outlet, have extremely varying quality of their 30 and 50amp outlets.
Not that there aren't strong arguments in favour of trailers as well (you note several).
QED there is a dude sleeping in that van for whom Stealthing is the case, and an observer outside the van for whom it is not the case; for all values of dude, van, and observer.
A custom build is arguably the only way to accommodate non standard sizes.
And, sure enough, it is. Winnebago did a Ford Transit van conversion. Converting Ford Transit vans to RVs is a thing. There are kits.
"Biodegradable counter tops"?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnebago_Industries#Current_m...>
* Class B - what you mentioned
* Class C - what you mentioned plus GMC vans and medium-duty Ford/Chevy/RAM trucks.
* Class A - Commercial bus and truck chassises. Freightliner, International, etc
No reason to build your own platform from the ground up the major brands have service centers nationwide.
- Class A: 20'--40', largest, up to 30,000 lb GVW.
- Class B: smallest, 17'--23' with the VW Bus camper van being the original (according to the source below). Think "camper van".
- Class C: Intermediate, 20'--35' length, usually on a van chassis with an over-the-cab design (usually integrating a bed).
There's also a range of trailers and camper-shell designs.
I believe that different drivers licence certifications may be required for some classes (particularly Class A).
<https://rvshare.com/blog/rv-classes/>
* Class B - Essentially built within the confines of a commercial cargo van.
* Class C - Built on a cab-over or chassis of a medium duty truck/van.
* Class A - Built on a heavy-duty bus chassis.
----
EDIT: There's also a class of "Super C" that's becoming more popular. Essentially, a Class C built on heavy duty truck. Great for towing.
I was looking at the photo wondering why they used the cheapest flimsy laminated particle board garbage on the cabinetry instead of real wood. For the prototype. That they use to try to sell the thing.
But no, they’re not actually being cheap. They chose painted cardboard instead of real construction materials because it is biodegradable.
I love it.
For aircraft, there's the additional aim of eliminating the on-board pilot through automation, remote control, or both, to increase passenger / cargo / payload capacity. You see this in drones as well as it being a clear goal in short-haul (< 300km typically) "commuter" aircraft proposals.
In the case of Winnebago, I suspect that there are the dual goals of hitting maximum vehicle curb weight goals (batteries are heavy) and reducing overall vehicle mass to maximise range.
"Biodegradable" is all but certainly a secondary or incidental consideration and/or marketing hype. Though reducing waste-stream is a Good Thing™.
The skateboard design of evs should work great in RV. More space, lower center of gravity, more storage.
You can probably take the base battery I'm the platform and strap an additional range extension battery in the back, that would likely be a lot more upgradeable, and just charge the driving battery with the extension battery for more range.
Or you could choose between an extension battery or an ice generator / range extender, or have both.
In the case of tractor-trailers, effective range remains on the order of single-digit miles / km, though I suspect keeping total vehicle weight within limits is a major part of that as well.
Yes, the undercarriage affords a large potential battery storage volume, but that's not the only consideration.
Range-extending battery trailers is a concept I've been suggesting for a number of years --- that would apply to standard passenger vehicles as well, and would also make for shorter charge-stops as the entire trailer could be swapped out. Battery condition and the usual issues of distributed / common ownership would of course be factors.
I don't understand what you mean by the single-digit miles/km. I know demonstrations in EV land are to be viewed with skepticism, but Tesla did demo a near-megawatt Tesla semi tractor that took a full gross weight load 500 miles. Granted that was a flatbed trailer with some concrete barriers so presumably better aerodynamics.
An RV made from the Tesla semi as a platform doesn't need to haul anywhere near that amount of weight, doesn't have the problematic boundary between tractor and trailer (it will be one vehicle, not towing an RV).
So one would expect a megawatt-sized tesla tractor as a platform, then about 12-20,000 more pounds for the RV portion... that is WAY underneath an 80,000 GVM even if the tractor is 20-30,000 lbs alone. So if a Tesla semi-derived RV has better aerodynamics that then overall tractor-trailer demonstration, that implies 600-700 miles range if the RV is half of 80,000lbs from the demonstration.
What am I missing?
Re: electrified overland cargo. I'm not fully current on details, but my understandings are that:
- High range usually occurs at low speed and over carefully-selected (e.g., flat) routes. There was a bus range-record set a while back which involved a stripped empty bus running at about 20 kph / 13 mph constant speed. Problem being of course that this is almost the precise opposite of a typical operation cycle especially for urban transit. Commute transit (with its dual morning/evening cycle) or intercity (presuming reasonable range) might be viable. Trolly busses which draw current from fixed infrastructure remain the presently viable electrification option, though perhaps with a small onboard battery capacity to move between conductor segments.
- High-load electrified cargo seems to be based on moving loads consistently downhill while relying on electrified traction for the return, unloaded, uphill segment. I'm aware of a quarry which operates such vehicles, and proposals for lumber shipments. These are effectively gravity powered with regenerative braking and electric storage. Again, a special use case.
- I vaguely recall a European trial using an EV cargo lorry for short-haul deliveries on the order of 4--6 km, which is where my "single-digit" range comment comes from. Not turning up a reference, though I believe that was by either Volvo or BMW.
- Gross vehicle weight is a major constraint for trucking, cuts directly into revenue-generating cargo margins (literally, load that pays), and remains a critical concern for EVs. Again, private passenger vehicles which already have a poor payload/vehicle mass ratio are an easy problem to solve here, and despite that, passenger EVs run heavy compared to ICE vehicles. For either mass transit or cargo freight, where payload mass is far higher relative to vehicle mass, there's far less latitude.
- Aerodynamics are the other concern. Drag increases with the square of speed, and options are for low-profile high-mass loads (e.g., flatbeds and plate-steel or concrete barriers), or low-mass high-profile loads (consumer electronics, light bulk materials, etc.). Each run into issues with cargo.
And with all that, there's what EV-based overland non-tracked cargo competes with: rail, trolly-bus or trolly-truck designs, barge or shipping traffic (where available), etc.
In particular, there's been remarkably little R&D in the conventional rail sector best I can tell (outside high-speed rail). It seems to me that there ought to be considerable opportunity for much greater efficiencies in flexible, dynamic, trainset assembly and re-routing, which would provide for the efficienies of rail transport (energy consumption reduced by a factor of 5x or more per tonne/km) without the consequent challenges of battery-based transport. (This is presuming freight rail is electrified, itself a point in which the US is notably lagging.)
Rail is efficient in terms of energy but not flexibility. Melding that efficiency with the flexibility of last-mile delivery (or last 50-mile delivery) afforded by conventional trucks seems to me a real game-changer. It seems odd that nobody seems to be working on this. Large logistics operators (Amazon, WalMart, UPS, FedEx, possibly existing rail or trucking organisations) might be potential candidates, but again, there's nothing that I'm aware of.
People bash Tesla, rightly so, for their exaggerations in timelines and AI bullshit, but one place they have generally kept to their projections is battery engineering, drivetrain efficiency, performance of the vehicles. Tesla says the car does 0-60 in 2.5 seconds? Well, it does. Tesla says the car goes XXX miles in normal temperature, wind, 65 mph? Well, it does.
Here's a teslarati story about the 500 mile trip (teslarati is about as pro-tesla as it gets, but what I care about it the route and battery levels that are there:
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-semi-full-500-mile-single-ch...
There are youtubes as well. Now, it is an EV land demo, so time will tell if there was a hidden fuel cell or a single-use battery. They probably played some games with tailwinds, but there are big climbs in there. And "highway speed" for a semi is different than for a car. On the climb, the Tesla probably gets to do what ICE trucks do: drive at 30-40mph even though the torque in the Tesla can handle climbs far better.
If they were in Colorado, they could be playing some games with the altitude. BEVs don't have the oxygen / thin air problems that ICEs do at altitude, and get the benefit of the reduced drag.
That was allegedly a megawatt-hour battery, aka 10x a Model S battery, probably cobalt/nickel. However, 200-230 wh/kg LFP is coming to mass production next year, and since those chemistries are far safer they don't need active cooling, they are a lot closer to NMC chemistries in overall pack density. So a 500 mile truck with NMC might be 400 miles with LFP, and that would be a big thing too.
The trucks are going to delivery with early pilot customer (PepsiCo) and while NDAs will likely about, if the truck range is total bullshit it will get out.
The GVW should be reduced by the heavier semi, but what is critical to remember is that electricity is cheaper than fuel, and with wind/solar continuing to drop in price by almost 10-20% per year, operating costs will drop. IN THEORY the BEV drivetrain has far less components and should be cheaper to maintain. Battery costs will drop substantially in the future (The Lithium and Sodium Sulfur chemistries may double the range of semis or more, or alternatively drop the weight of the semi with smaller batteries).
Rail has pretty good efficiencies with diesel-electric, maybe the sulfur chemistries will allow the trains to switch to all-electric. I am definitely NOT a hydrogen enthusiast, but hydrogen may be the way to go with trains since the refueling infrastructure is so much more concentrated. But rail may be waiting for solid state, sodium-sulfur, or lithium-sulfur technologies, which may deliver densities and cost advantages that even the mature diesel-electric locomotives can't compete with.
Anyway, safe to say that the Tesla will be at least a 300 mile functional tractor for a semi, and that's the 1.0 version. We'll see.
In addition to weighing less than plastic coated particleboard, you can actually run a router along the edges so you don’t bark yourself on the corner of that table every time you walk past.
But this way saves four dollars and looks modern, so mass produced RVs use it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/photos-winnebagos-electric-c...
My 35ft 30,000 lbs diesel Class A RV has a 800 mile range so will be a while before it interests me.
What I am waiting for is someone to get their hands on a Tesla Semi and convert to a large Super C, now that could be interesting.
https://electrek.co/2022/12/03/tesla-semi-electric-motorhome...
You can already buys similar things on diesel Class 8 chassis I was just sitting in one at the Tampa RV show:
Is the pitch going to be to provide the missing “grid battery” for our energy strategy, you have a battery that only leaves home 10-12 times a year on average so use a bunch of these spread out across the nation to provide short term energy stores?
The normal EV benefits - moving tailpipe emissions out of population centres, reducing maintenance costs, extending vehicle service life, etc etc - these don’t jump out as problems for diesel RVs today.
- Fuel cost when traveling is significant. And the whole point of owning such a thing is covering some distance. So, it's nice if you can travel long distances without having to worry about that
- Evs are pretty comfortable to drive, have lots of torque, and are easy to operate. All great stuff for e.g. elderly/retired drivers.
- Having a huge battery is nice when you are not driving. Basically you can cook, have all sorts of appliances, have hot water, etc. and use that for days before you need to charge the battery. So, you can go off grid with this thing and live in relative comfort. It's also a reason that the new F150 is extremely popular.
- Maintenance is a big deal with RVs. Plenty of people drive really old and crappy ones and they can break down at inconvenient times (i.e, while traveling). And when that happens it's a lot of hassle and also costly. And even when that doesn't happen, you still need to deal with costly inspections, repairs, etc. EVs have a lot less of those issues. More reliable, less moving parts that can break, etc. Nice to not have to worry about that as much when you are traveling.
- For the same reason, the second hand value of electric vehicles is pretty good; they don't depreciate as much. And if the battery isn't used that much, the vehicle can last quite long. So you buy one, use if for some years and then you sell it on and get a good portion of your money back all while having enjoyed the benefits of all of the above. Doesn't sound like a bad deal.
And as you note, marketing. We're discussing it here, after all.
Recently, we took a 2-3 month trip in our 25' vehicle and at some points we were averaging $100-150/day on fuel (10 mpg, $6/gallon). I'd love to see the price of electric van/bus chassis come down.
For more and more people, this is their way of life rather than just a little annual trip. Not everyone is going to buy a new RV, but a reasonable number are looking at financing a van for conversion rather than slave over a DIY project with limited skills.
Keep in mind that right now, with gas or diesel motors, there’s winnebagos which almost reach half a million dollars new.
Many offset the downsides of the generator with solar, which is increasingly viable, but having it all in a EV especially considering fuel prices is a dream. Even then, using the generator only applies with boondocking. When i'm working full time on a project on the road, I just go to a campground or RV park with full hookups.
Full electric drivetrain, but with a small gas generator used as a charger to range-extend when not near a fixed chargepoint, or when in motion
Trains do diesel electric for precise traction control not efficiency, they make up the efficiency loss with low rolling resistance and aero drag.
* eAWD is a fantastic enhancement for RWD vehicles that don't handle snow well.
* Having a giant, off-grid battery. Right now, I'm limited by my battery capacity. I either need to add more batteries or install a generator.
2 weeks is 14 days, in a sunny climate you can reckon on 5 solid solar hours so 70 charging hours.
128kwh / 70 charging hours is 1.82 kw.
You can probably fit a 480w panel on the roof of said reference Vanagon so you will need to get 4 and stack em 4 high. Maybe fold them out like an awning?
There's also an advantage in warm climates / seasons to a stand-off roof --- air-gap between panels and the actual surface of the vehicle) which provide effective shading and reduce cooling load --- either to permit passive cooling via fans or as an assist to an air-conditioning unit (fairly rare on vans).
There's also a pretty frequent use of fuel-based house services: space heat (e.g., Webasto heaters, by Cummins: <https://www.cummins.com/na/sales-and-service/webasto-heating...>), stovetops (often propane), and hot water, though you'll also see electric (induction cooktop, microwave or electric oven, electric hot-water, resistance strip heating in floors). Latter require a pretty beafy electrical system, generator, and/or "shore power" (connection to grid mains).
(I've looked into the van-life thing for a while. Ultimately it's expensive for the nicer rigs and/or involves a lot of sacrifices, and combines risks of a residence and vehicle. Not to say it can't work, but there are major considerations, and the postcard view often provided is not the whole story.)
I recently got an ICE motorhome for long cross country trips and will be no longer taking my Model Y around the country. I'm going to miss the Autopilot quite a bit.
- crap range
- no range extending generator
- no highway self driving / driving assist
Tesla semi is the seminal EV RV event, when it actually hits mainstream.
This thing has a hundred mile range? Probably costs 150k before customization/ outfit?
A Tesla semi will probably be 250k for a 400-500 mile range(remember the RV is lighter than a semi load) and will support much wider ranges of customization. So 250k for a hundred mile range or 400k for a 500 mile Tesla RV?
And while so much of Tesla self driving is smoke and mirrors, based on watching various supportive/critical videos, it would be enormously useful for highway driving
I've driven two c class RVs long range, and wow is it mentally exhausting, RVs require a lot more attention than a car on the highway, I can see a L2 self driving system very useful.
The other thing that is very annoying in RVs is the lack of torque, in rolling Midwest you have to build up speed downhill then bleed it off, otherwise the RV downshifts very annoyingly.
And the heavy battery lowering the center of gravity will be great too, the RVs are always a bit unstable.
And the torque for EVs going up mountains will be incredibly useful.
Why two batteries in the water Winnebago? Probably because they don't have the knowhow to tap into the transit battery. That seems pretty slapdash.
One thing this crappy range RV design may be alleviated with is if they can make some fuel cell or rotary generator that can charge the battery/ extend the range. If RVs can be all electric while plopped at a site and electric for 50-80% of driven range, that would still be a big improvement.
And again, much like the professed total lifecycle economics of the semi, an EV RV or PHEV RV should improve the transit costs significantly. So if the idea is serious driving distances, the initial capital outlay for aN EV drivetrain becomes more palatable with fuel cost savings.
Those inside our rotary patents so far haven't gone anywhere. Mazda is finally looking into PHEV rotary, which if the rotary is doing ng constant power output for recharge duty only seems to resolve a lot of issues with Wankels in variable torque output situations, but we'll see.
But I have maybe a half million I'd drop on a Tesla semi derived RV with decent highway self driving or driving assist, a compact ICe generator for emergency range extension or backup, solar panels for all electric power, mobile starlink for comms.
All of that is very feasible once the semi releases, but I doubt the current RV industry will do it.
Tesla is allegedly "visionary" and RVs like this represent attainable housing for the next generation, so maybe Tesla will get into that business.
There's also typically ventilation to reduce moisture/condensation build-up in cold climates. Even with heat-exchange air circulation, the incoming air does require additional heating.
So, yes, this is a legitimate concern.
Running that heater for 24 hours a day would take 12kWh - or about 1/6 of the battery in an electric van.
That seems feasible to me. Sure, it's a bit annoying - you have to charge more often - but you could get through a couple of days off grid.
There is no reason they could be more advanced with lower temperature support, they would just cost more. Many people put mini splits when making their own RV's because they work better and want to run off battery as much as possible.
And also, as you say, they will usually be on power (also because they’ll want to charge up for their next leg, which solar will not be sufficient for) so I’m twice over not seeing a reason for concern here.
Most vans max out around 3kWth. I have seen people use a used Tesla battery, but only have seen one report.
Bigger issue is the current range limit of 108 miles. Not really sure why they bothered to design an interior before solving that minor issue.
This van had a 48v house battery that ran air conditioner and inverter and some DC-DC converters for step down from 400v traction battery to 48v house to 12v systems, they had the electrical system layed out on a board which was interesting. Most RV systems are 12v or 120v at this point in the US.
If that’s 108 highway miles, it would cover about 80% of my RV trips. Even when I go on a long trip, I usually don’t drive much more than 200 miles in a day, so with a charge stop in the middle, this could work even for a long trip. Assuming, of course, that I can find a DC fast charger so a charge stop is 45 minutes and not 8 hours.
But RV parks will need time to prepare and put in metered chargers, since most aren’t going to be able to handle many eRVs charging at 240v/50a all night long, many already have trouble keeping up with AC loads on a hot day.
12 kilowatt hours of battery is close 10 $10K in cost and takes 6 feet by 6 feet area and weighs 200lb.
Whatever you may think, in RV world:
1. Heat only can be done with gas/diesel/propane 2. AC consistently only on shore power 3. Cooking on propane 4. You will still be not living consistently in cold areas (like the Rockies) or warm areas (like FL). 5. Most of those long term rviers just hang on campgrounds for the electric power reasons (and sewer hookup).
So, electric RV is a dumb idea and will never be here.
Anyway, a lower end Tesla can be bought for around 40-50K. It comes with 60kwh of battery and they make a nice profit on them and you are obviously buying a whole car, not just the battery. So your battery cost argument is simply wrong
Cost of batteries actually dropped below 100$/kwh probably quite some time ago for them. So the cost for 100kwh battery would be less than 10K at this point. You are off by an order of magnitude.
These are not light vehicles obviously. But an RV is way bigger than a Tesla and you could probably easily fit 200kwh of batteries in there. Or more. Which is nice for range but overkill for just running the AC or heating. People drive EVs in the arctic circle in Norway. -18C is a nice warm winter day over there. You'd want the heating on, obviously. This is not a problem. It's a solved problem.
The new tesla semi probably has close to a mwh. I think the F150 has 130 kwh and you can run your house on it for days.
Most electric vans have around 60-70 kwh. Which is pretty modest and enough for a modest range. And yet it's plenty for a recreational vehicle although a bit limiting in range probably. If you are going out camping in extreme conditions, you might want a bigger battery than that. But otherwise, it's completely fine for recreational use for normal people as is.
Electric RV, you just can't, sorry.
And you plug your van in when you get there.
If you're the type to boondock you have solar panels, extra solar panels and a generator.
Ever since, I’ve wished for a hybrid RV that was basically a gas powered generator putting power into batteries, running the drive train when you need to move and powering everything else (heat, ac, computer, etc.) when you’re parked.
For whatever reason, no such vehicle seems to exist.
Camping in a car is not an issue at all. Living in a van or an RV is an entirely a different game. For that you need from 2 to 4 kilowatts of heat, for days on end. If you let the temps inside drop below freezing even once, you are dead, all the plumbing is frozen and batteries are out of commission until you warm them up.
Solar is useless in winter. Finding shore power is hard.
There are solved problems in van life and unsolved ones. The heat is solved with gas/diesel. The AC is not solved at all.
As far as the range, I drive a disel van with a range of 400+ miles. It's okay but often times I wish I had more.
Forget it, EV RV is a dumb idea and is never coming. It does not mean they won't be selling one. There's always a sucker to buy.
(I have lived for a month in a van in Montana/Colorado/Wyoming. Camped in a Forester for months all over. Lived and worked in a van for 30 days in PNW in spring).