[wnevets]

> Oshkosh's proposed vehicle will only average 8.6 mpg (27.35 L/100 km) according to the EPA, a barely noticeable improvement on the current Grumman-made LLV trucks, which average 8.2 mpg (28.68 L/100 km).

Such a wasted opportunity

[MBCook]

It’s a really hard task to make an efficient gas vehicle that stops and starts constantly. They’re just really bad at it.

Sure you can make it a full hybrid but then you’re like 80% of the way there to a battery vehicle anyway.

Also note that while the new one isn’t that much better it is providing air-conditioning. And the whole truck looks bigger so I suspect it weighs more. So the engine is doing more work than in the LLV.

[ProfessorLayton]

>Sure you can make it a full hybrid but then you’re like 80% of the way there to a battery vehicle anyway.

This sounds like a good thing? Currently the most expensive component of electric vehicles are their batteries, so hybrids seem optimal. Hybrids excel at the exact use cases mail trucks have, so it seems a bit baffling they didn't go with that form of electrification.

Toyota has proven maintenance and reliability aren't an issue with hybrid tech.

[MBCook]

Full hybrid has the downsides of electric (electric stuff to be serviced and weight/costs associated) and the downsides of gas (emissions, complexity of maintenance + engine, weight/cost of engine).

These are government fleet vehicles being used for lots of miles every day. They're going to use these for 20+ years. If the up front cost is a little higher but it has a big payoff, it's totally worth it.

The calculus is different from an individual's car. I still don't think it's worth it there now that electric has gotten so much cheaper, but that's a personal decision.

> Hybrids excel at the exact use cases mail trucks have

Compared to gas, yes. But the thing is electric cards excel even more.

> Toyota has proven maintenance and reliability aren't an issue with hybrid tech.

They proved it works reliably. But it's still far more complicated than an EV drivetrain with WAY WAY more high tolerance parts that wear. It's never going to be cheaper in maintenance.

[ProfessorLayton]

1: The cost of the gas engine is offset by the reduction in cost and weight of a smaller hybrid battery.

2: Hybrid buses are already a thing, and they're subject to even more usage and wear, and work very reliably.

3: Cheaper maintenance as an absolute number isn't the goal, but a reduction in total cost of ownership. Remember there's a bunch of gas that's not being used or paid for. The lower the starting MPG, the higher the benefits electrification brings.

[Johnny555]

Sure you can make it a full hybrid but then you’re like 80% of the way there to a battery vehicle anyway.

But then you don't need to build dozens of charging ports at post offices that may or may not have the electrical infrastructure to charge a fleet of mail trucks every night

[MBCook]

It's a fleet vehicle. The government can afford it and it will pay off in spades over the lifetime of the vehicles.

Upfront cost doesn't matter nearly as much as lifetime cost. And the difference is not going to be small.

[vlovich123]

Wasted opportunity for what?

> In December 2022, USPS announced that 75% of its initial order of 60,000 NGDVs would be BEVs. By 2026, all new NGDVs ordered will be delivered as BEVs.

So the should be very few of these ICE variants around presumably primarily in areas where the charging capacity is impractical to install. I don’t know how 8.6 mpg fares against similar trucks to know whether better ICE alternatives were possible and hybrid would likely add significant weight, cost and maintenance for likely little comparative value.

[MetaWhirledPeas]

> in areas where the charging capacity is impractical

Educate me: why would charging capacity be impractical anywhere? They would build and use their own chargers.

Are there places that have weak grid power?

[vlovich123]

Chargers cost $$ to deploy and there may not be a sufficient amount of customers and trucks to warrant that money (+ may not have easy maintenance for BEVs in those places). That could be one explanation. And yes, there are probably a lot of places where the power grid wouldn't be rated to charge up truck batteries and need updates of infrastructure such as transformers to deliver that amount of electricity to the postal depot.

I'm not informed on the matter but those would be my best guesses.

[MetaWhirledPeas]

Repairs (not maintenance per say) might be something.

I'm not convinced the chargers would be a problem, considering home chargers cost a couple thousand to install. As for infrastructure: can the building run a clothes dryer? Then it can probably charge an EV.

For repairs I'm sure the current LLVs have their own challenges. There's a good chance you can't find LLV parts in rural areas either. (Maybe they just swap them out and do repairs at the home base?) So EVs are not much different in that regard.

[vlovich123]

> considering home chargers cost a couple thousand to install

Home chargers, unless your neighborhood and/or home has special infrastructure to deliver more power, are limited to 120V. You have to remember that these are huge trucks with huge batteries and it’s not immediately obvious they can deal with trickle charging. And you’re not charging just 1 vehicle at a time but basically charging your entire fleet and you need this to be reliable 24/7. The logistics and costs of that are entirely different from a home charger.

> As for infrastructure: can the building run a clothes dryer? Then it can probably charge an EV.

again - your mental model is wrong. As you scale up your challenges are different and charging a fleet of vehicles. It’s not a laundry service so it may not have been provisioned for that many clothes dryers running at once and need substantial renovations. And you may want chargers that pull a heck of a lot more than a dryer because you need this to charge more quickly. Think about a fast charging station - it’s energy requirements are not at all the same and that’s why often at places you only see one or two (partially cost / demand for them but also being able to supply that energy is a real thing). Think of it this way - normal outlet is at 1.4 KW which is slow for a car and who knows how long for a truck battery. Faster chargers range from 3.7 kWh to 350kw and multiple that by the number of vehicles you need to charge simultaneously. It’s not necessarily the straightforward problem you think it is

> For repairs I'm sure the current LLVs have their own challenges. There's a good chance you can't find LLV parts in rural areas either.

The supply chain and knowledge base for ICE vehicles is far more established in rural areas. And usually you’re trying not to ship vehicles around for repairs but repair them locally instead. In theory BEV requires less maintenance and lasts longer so things could balance out but who knows since BEV trucks are pretty rare and this is the first of its kind design from a company not necessarily known for their BEV expertise.