Ramcharger article

[HeyTheresTony]

What do you think of the RamCharger?

 

[Yardbird]

Very interesting article. The writer sure makes a case for the truck.

Now, if it actually works as it should, and is not plagued with electrical gremlins.

 

[Dodge 1500 4X4]

Very interesting article. The writer sure makes a case for the truck

My biggest take from this is how is the general public going to afford this technology W a powerplant that also has Cam, tappet and oil cooler problems, are they going to have a backup engine for it!!!

 

[HeyTheresTony]

Of course the article assumes that the pre-release information provided by Stellantis is correct. If it is, this truck might be a game changer. It would be for the use case presented in this article but that may not work for everybody.

Time will tell.

As for affordability - let's hope it's not priced in the stratosphere. New trucks are already really, really expensive as it is!

 

[ppine]

The old Ramchargers were like the full sized Ford Bronco. They had manual trans and a V-8 engine. I drove lots of them for work trucks in the bush. Short and easy to manuever.

Now comes the new EV Ramcharger. Let me know when the towing range increases. EVs are best operated between 20% and 80% charge. That means even if you have a 300 mile range, most of the time you are going to only use about 200 miles of it. If you are towing, then that number gets a lot smaller. In a place like Nevada that is just not going to work.

It is way to early for any States to be outlawing gas engines. I would be willing to embrace EV tech once the range is 700 miles like my Ram diesel.

 

[kurek]

I think the RamCharger is cool, my sister has a BMW i3 REX which is also an electric vehicle with a combustion engine that turns on after the battery has been depleted for effectively unlimited range (as long as you can keep putting gasoline in it) .

There are some problems with it but those are specific to that car not to the general idea of the drivetrain.

Does anyone know what the actual torque of the RamCharger is, final drive at the wheels? I'm asking because so far every EV truck is quoting torque at the wheels and they're really not comparable with how conventional, combustion engine trucks are rated.

I want to be very clear that I'm asking from actual curiosity and not from an adversarial position. I do not care about any political anything here. We are talking TRUCKS.

For example Rivian quad motor AWD trucks have supposedly "14,000 Nm" of torque at the wheels* which is about 10,325 ft-lbs which sounds impressive until you calculate the torque at the wheels for any combustion powered truck. To save you the effort a 4th gen Ram 1500 hemi 4x4 w/ 8 speed transmission does over 20,000 ft-lbs before factoring a little overrun on the torque converter which would boost it even more.

The other drawback on a quad motor system like Rivian is that each wheel only gets a quarter of that torque; or nearly (the rear motors are more powerful than the fronts on that truck specifically) so each individual wheel can only see a quarter of the total torque. If you were pulling a stump out of the ground for example a 4 cylinder 1998 Kia Sportage can send 5689 ft-lbs of torque to the two rear wheels while a Rivian R1T if the quoted 14,000Nm total torque and 54% rear bias is true, can only do 5575 ft-lbs to the rear wheels. In other words if you had a stump to pull or a stuck tractor you might get a better result throwing bubba in the back seat of a 90s 4 cylinder Kia..

A 4th gen Hemi Ram can deliver 4 times that torque to the back wheels. If your anti-spin diff isn't worn out you could probably deliver most or all of it to a single rear wheel.

Regarding any kind of daily driving this doesn't matter because you've got all four wheels on asphalt and the only weight you need to accelerate is your truck and its contents. It doesn't matter much off-road either if your only goal is to move the truck itself.

Here's the BUT..

What if you want to extract a stuck vehicle or piece of equipment. What if you want to pull a stump out of your front yard. What if you're collapsing an old garage that's too dangerous to disassemble up close. What if you're pull starting an old tractor. I know these things might sound far out if you live in a condominium but there's still a few of us in the world who own trucks because we need to use every inch of them and I'm curious if Ram's built this truck for us.


* I have seen the Rivian quad motor quoted as having 14,000Nm of combined torque, which is 10,325 ft-lbs however I have also seen it printed that the motors use "direct drive" and do not incorporate a reduction gear. The rear pair is rated (together) 495 ft-lbs and the front pair (together) is rated 413 ft-lbs which is less than 10% of the above figure and I find hard to believe because a direct 908 ft-lbs at the wheels is almost golf cart numbers

 

[Dodge 1500 4X4]

I want to be very clear that I'm asking from actual curiosity and not from an adversarial position. I do not care about any political anything here. We are talking TRUCKS.

You mentioning this tells me all I need to know!!!

 

[Atticus]

Somewhere, I think your units are way off and you are not comparing apples and apples.

For example, in the Rivian the front two motors (together) produce 413 ft-lbs of torque and the rears (together) add another 495 ft-lbs. TOTAL torque is 908 ft-lbs or about 1230 Nm (not 12,000 Nm). In contrast, the 5.7 Hemi has around 410 ft-lbs.

Torque delivery is much different insofar that the electric engines can have 100% of their max available instantaneously.

In your "grunt pulling" scenarios, the electric motors have the potential to be "much better" than an ICE engine getting torque to the ground sooner at slower speeds, but in practice both the EV as well as the ICE will be limited by tire traction. (In theory, the EV may once again have a small edge because of the added weight.)

 

[kurek]

Somewhere, I think your units are way off and you are not comparing apples and apples.

For example, in the Rivian the front two motors (together) produce 413 ft-lbs of torque and the rears (together) add another 495 ft-lbs. TOTAL torque is 908 ft-lbs or about 1230 Nm (not 12,000 Nm). In contrast, the 5.7 Hemi has around 410 ft-lbs.

Torque delivery is much different insofar that the electric engines can have 100% of their max available instantaneously.

In your "grunt pulling" scenarios, the electric motors have the potential to be "much better" than an ICE engine getting torque to the ground sooner at slower speeds, but in practice both the EV as well as the ICE will be limited by tire traction. (In theory, the EV may once again have a small edge because of the added weight.)

This motor trend article says Rivian has "direct drive transaxles" - https://www.motortrend.com/features...e-review-trans-america-trail-off-road-part-2/



If the transaxles are "Direct Drive" then that means wheel torque is motor torque. By comparison a ford pinto can deliver 1273 ft-lbs to the wheels in 1st gear. If the Rivian axles are "Direct Drive" to the motors, and the motors make 908 ft-lbs torque then a Ford Pinto would demolish a Rivian in a drag race, at least up to 20mph

We know that isn't true.

In this interview with Richard Farquhar (Rivian VP of propulsion) https://chargedevs.com/features/qa-with-rivians-vp-of-propulsion-full-interview/
he says "Each drive unit assembly has two electric motors – four total – independently connected to the driven wheel with a fixed-ratio single-speed gearbox"


and then later in the same interview he says "We achieve over 14,000 Newton-meters of grounded torque at the wheels combined"


That sounds completely reasonable and he would know since that's his whole job. Cool. But that still means a Kia Sportage can factually deliver more torque to its rear wheels than a Rivian R1T, period. Apples to apples.

I'm certain that's fine for a Rivian because let's be real that truck isn't being marketed to rural folks. I am curious about the RamCharger because Ram clearly wants to address range anxiety and charging and I like it so far, but no matter what they say 10k ft-lbs divided among four wheels (and never more than ~50% to the rear) is not at all the same thing as 20k ft-lbs to the back wheels which is what a hemi ram has right now. Whatever the front wheels can supply is basically meaningless from a dig because they're not going to benefit from any weight transfer. On a longitudinal drivetrain with a locked center coupling the rear axle can get 100% of the total torque.

I do not care one bit about 0-60 times I care about getting work done.

I know eveyone is just a name on the internet. I grew up on a working farm and been an outdoorsman my whole life. It doesn't make me special but I think it's fair to say I have a real good handle on the topic of pulling stationary and reluctant objects with a chain and a pickup truck on every kind of surface. Anybody who's lived that life has. That's where I'm coming from. If Ram wants to sell these trucks to people like me I'm all ears; convince me. I don't care if it's powered by gas, electrons, mashed potatoes.. will it get the job done and keep money in my pocket?

 

[dafish]

At least one possible answer: Compare using HP. Torque can be both misleading and a tad meaningless, HP cannot as it's not subject to gearing.

 

[kurek]

At least one possible answer: Compare using HP. Torque can be both misleading and a tad meaningless, HP cannot as it's not subject to gearing.

All motors make the same horsepower at 0 RPM regardless of how much torque they produce.

 

[Randy Grant]

I think the RamCharger is cool, my sister has a BMW i3 REX which is also an electric vehicle with a combustion engine that turns on after the battery has been depleted for effectively unlimited range (as long as you can keep putting gasoline in it) .

There are some problems with it but those are specific to that car not to the general idea of the drivetrain.

Does anyone know what the actual torque of the RamCharger is, final drive at the wheels? I'm asking because so far every EV truck is quoting torque at the wheels and they're really not comparable with how conventional, combustion engine trucks are rated.

I want to be very clear that I'm asking from actual curiosity and not from an adversarial position. I do not care about any political anything here. We are talking TRUCKS.

For example Rivian quad motor AWD trucks have supposedly "14,000 Nm" of torque at the wheels* which is about 10,325 ft-lbs which sounds impressive until you calculate the torque at the wheels for any combustion powered truck. To save you the effort a 4th gen Ram 1500 hemi 4x4 w/ 8 speed transmission does over 20,000 ft-lbs before factoring a little overrun on the torque converter which would boost it even more.

The other drawback on a quad motor system like Rivian is that each wheel only gets a quarter of that torque; or nearly (the rear motors are more powerful than the fronts on that truck specifically) so each individual wheel can only see a quarter of the total torque. If you were pulling a stump out of the ground for example a 4 cylinder 1998 Kia Sportage can send 5689 ft-lbs of torque to the two rear wheels while a Rivian R1T if the quoted 14,000Nm total torque and 54% rear bias is true, can only do 5575 ft-lbs to the rear wheels. In other words if you had a stump to pull or a stuck tractor you might get a better result throwing bubba in the back seat of a 90s 4 cylinder Kia..

A 4th gen Hemi Ram can deliver 4 times that torque to the back wheels. If your anti-spin diff isn't worn out you could probably deliver most or all of it to a single rear wheel.

Regarding any kind of daily driving this doesn't matter because you've got all four wheels on asphalt and the only weight you need to accelerate is your truck and its contents. It doesn't matter much off-road either if your only goal is to move the truck itself.

Here's the BUT..

What if you want to extract a stuck vehicle or piece of equipment. What if you want to pull a stump out of your front yard. What if you're collapsing an old garage that's too dangerous to disassemble up close. What if you're pull starting an old tractor. I know these things might sound far out if you live in a condominium but there's still a few of us in the world who own trucks because we need to use every inch of them and I'm curious if Ram's built this truck for us.


* I have seen the Rivian quad motor quoted as having 14,000Nm of combined torque, which is 10,325 ft-lbs however I have also seen it printed that the motors use "direct drive" and do not incorporate a reduction gear. The rear pair is rated (together) 495 ft-lbs and the front pair (together) is rated 413 ft-lbs which is less than 10% of the above figure and I find hard to believe because a direct 908 ft-lbs at the wheels is almost golf cart numbers

Lot of what ifs there. What if we use a 80k truck for real truck stuff, like maybe a 2500 or 2300. Or, what if we use a tractor. I just don't see many people using a 1/2 ton truck for that what if kind of stuff. The Ramcharger will do a lot of the stuff a 1/2 ton does now, just a little differently.
Personally, I'll just wait and see.

 

[dafish]

All motors make the same horsepower at 0 RPM regardless of how much torque they produce.

Yes. And thus are doing no work. The moment they so much as twitch the work performed is universally called "power" be it measured in HP, KW, or etc.. Simple fact: The one that delivers the most HP will perform the most work each and every time. If that work is done too quickly one gears it do suit.

Mind you I assumed you cared about the work they could actually do and were seeking ways to evaluate same. Perhaps I was wrong. Best of luck in however you figure it out!

 

[kurek]

Yes. And thus are doing no work. The moment they so much as twitch the work performed is universally called "power" be it measured in HP, KW, or etc.. Simple fact: The one that delivers the most HP will perform the most work each and every time. If that work is done too quickly one gears it do suit.

Mind you I assumed you cared about the work they could actually do and were seeking ways to evaluate same. Perhaps I was wrong. Best of luck in however you figure it out!

I sincerely don't have any idea why this is causing such controversy.

A BMW CE-04 electric motorcycle has 42 horsepower and my walk-behind rototiller has 5 horsepower and with sufficient traction my tiller would pull three of those bikes from the instant I squeeze the bail until it runs out of gas 3 hours later. Can you guess why?

Actually don't answer that I'm not going to bother reading this forum anymore I'll just wait till the truck ships and check it out then. Seems like every time I try to participate here it turns into an argument and I'm too dumb to figure out why.

 

[pacofortacos]

Power shouldn't be a problem as an electric motor makes full power almost instantly vs. an ice engine (esp. gas motors) needs rpm to build torque.
Which is why locomotives are built the way they are.

Now they may limit the power sent to the electric motor (aka torque limiting) to protect the frame, etc., but I think that there would be a decent amount of power available since it would take a fair amount to start pulling with a max load.

As a whole, EV's aren't ragged on for lack of power - at least not that I have ever heard anyone complain about.

 

[pacofortacos]

I sincerely don't have any idea why this is causing such controversy.

A BMW CE-04 electric motorcycle has 42 horsepower and my walk-behind rototiller has 5 horsepower and with sufficient traction my tiller would pull three of those bikes from the instant I squeeze the bail until it runs out of gas 3 hours later. Can you guess why?

Actually don't answer that I'm not going to bother reading this forum anymore I'll just wait till the truck ships and check it out then. Seems like every time I try to participate here it turns into an argument and I'm too dumb to figure out why.

I think it all has to do with how much power is delivered to the motor, ie. the controller programming - most (all?) EV's have controllers on them.
You don't want to overheat the motor, battery/s, wiring, etc. or want full power from a dead stop for most vehicles for drivability and safety reasons.

 

[NCRaineman]

To much speculating going on. IMO at this point it is best to wait and see. The vehicle is generating a lot of hype, when more real world data is available we will surely see it.

Will the vehicle be great for some people? Sure. If you are the typical suburban homeowner and need a short range commuter vehicle during the week and something to run to the Home Depot or pull a small trailer with on the weekend it will work fine and save you a lot of gas.

Will it save owners any money? Probably not. Again speculating but this thing is claimed to have 600hp so it will likely be positioned as a top trim package... TRX levels of price, if not more. That will be it's undoing, the people who could really benefit from it won't be able to afford it.

All in all it will be an interesting technology demonstrator "Hey, look what we can do!" but the cost of all that tech will keep it out of the hands of most consumers.

 

[Atticus]

Kurek - don't leave!

The principle reason that there are big differences in the numbers/computations is because some of the time we are referring to the max TQ capability of the motor(s) - be it an ICE or electric motor and then at other times we are citing reference to where folks are speaking about torque multiplication through gearing.

Simplistically, your question is a good one. In it's simplest form you are essentially asking, "OK Mr. car manufacturer, so you are offering me a vehicle that has a motor with X amount of torque.... but I want/need to know what kind of gearing/transmission you are providing!" Your concern is that you want a vehicle that has some low granny-gear(s) where you can really do some stump pulling whereas other users may be satisfied with just high gears (low numerically) for freeway cruising.

Vehicles with ICE engines HAVE to have gearing.... or they just wouldn't be very drivable. Imagine your favorite 1/2 ton pick-up delivered to you with a 400 TQ capable ICE engine and a transmission with just 4th gear. Drag race that set-up with an EV having an electric motor also rated at 400 TQ. The EV would kill the ICE equivalent in this single-gear set-up because the EV can produce all 400 TQ from the get-go.

But, as you have read from the Rivian exec, to get the 14,000 Nm to the ground, they are obviously doing gearing between the motor and the wheels (albeit a single, fixed gear). Suffice to say, virtually all of the ev makers are providing MORE power to the ground than there ICE equivalents so I think the vast, vast majority of the scenarios will be limited by tire traction instead of a limitation of available torque from the motor.

 

[Fake-Account27]

I have a cummins truck because I tow a travel trailer all summer, however it's not a practical truck of around town driving. City gas millage is really bad and its huge. So I bought an EV bolt for local trips.

In theory I could trade both my truck and Bolt in for the ramcharger. It has more than enough range for all my local driving, and the Hybrid / EV features have many of the same advantages a diesel does for towing. Regenerative braking is very similar to the Diesel exhaust brake, and the EV motors have instant high torque. Plus you get the electric for local driving.

However 130 miles of range is half what my Bolt gets with roughly the same battery. That's about 11 cents a mile, the bolt is 5 cents, My cummins is 20 cents a mile.