Smith Electric Vehicles – Distance And Energy Consumption


Smith Newton

Smith Newton

Kansas City based Smith Electric Vehicles seems to going underwater, but hundreds of Newton electric trucks and step-in-vans are still running silently in the U.S. and Europe.

When we look at data presented by the company in May, 2013 we find several interesting things on Newton trucks.

Most of those electric trucks daily are going less than 70 miles, but some of them (probably with larger battery packs) can go up to 140 miles. The average energy consumption is at 1.3 kWh per mile or about 80 kWh per 60 miles.

In total, 422 vehicles bought with DOE funding covered in 1,751,104 miles on 2,304,362 kWh of energy in 2012. 278,325 kWh were regenerated, so that’s 12%.

Smith Electric Vehicles - Distance And Energy Consumption

Smith Electric Vehicles – Distance And Energy Consumption

Interesting is the Daily charging and driving profile graph, which showing us when trucks are plugged-in most often.

Smith Electric Vehicles - Daily Charging And Driving Profile

Smith Electric Vehicles – Daily Charging And Driving Profile

Category: General


17 responses to "Smith Electric Vehicles – Distance And Energy Consumption"
  1. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

    That’s ~26mpge, which ain’t too bad for trucking..

    1. Spec9 says:

      Really? That seems low. Since I suspect these are mostly doing relatively slow-speed driving, I’d expect better. Hmm.

      What MPG do similar diesel trucks get?

      1. Anon says:

        Depends on the class of vehicle, but not very good…

        The Smith MPGe is actually substantially higher, compared to same class vehicles using diesel.

        1. Spec9 says:

          Thanks for the link. The Smith vehicles seem like they are in the Class 4 to 5 range. And those get 6 to 12 MPG in ICE form. So I guess 26MPGe is pretty good. If you go with 9MPG average then they are getting nearly 3X the ICE mileage. That is pretty similar to car to EV improvement I guess.

          Damn . . . at 9MPG and if they put a lot of miles on these, it really seems like an EV would pay off in reasonable time. Especially since I assume that these big diesel trucks are probably expensive too since they are not high volume like cars.

          1. GeorgeS says:

            Typical deal. The payoff numbers are there but it’s the up front $ that freak ’em out.

          2. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

            Not just that, but many places have anti-idling regs, especially cities who don’t want diesel fumes getting into ground-level ventilation or crowded sidewalks. Plus the noise from diesels in city cycle is both varied and loud.

    2. GeorgeS says:

      check Doc. good figgerin’

  2. ClarksonCote says:

    I could be wrong, but I would think the vehicles going 140 are just charging in between or something, rather than larger battery packs. The latter seems more cost prohibitive.

  3. GeorgeS says:

    Looks like they could get most of the driving done on around 60 kwh, same size as the Tesla 60…so definitely doable.

    Then just add a RE for the rest.

    1. Spec9 says:

      Hmm. . . which is cheaper, a range-extender or 20KWH extra batteries? Actually, you need to add maintenance for the range-extender so it is probably easier to just go with an 80KWH pack.

      Tesla should get into this business since they may have the best battery pack prices.

      1. GeorgeS says:

        yeh but even 80 still won’t be enough. @350$/kwh it would be another 7000$, shouldn’t be a problem to do a RE for that much.
        If I was driving the truck, i’d want the RE…and you’d have way more than 62 miles of range.

        1. Spec9 says:

          Tesla is supposedly down in the $200s/KWH range

  4. ExSmithPartner says:

    Smith is an expensive falling apart and outdated EV nonsense. These vehicles – Newton and Edison (existed in Europe) are hand build and can be compared only with a poor garage conversion. Each is absolutely unique with no such thing as quality or consistency. Uses an outdated powertrain which can only be laughed at in 2014 at a very premium price. Never delivered on any promise.
    The slides above are from “famous” SmithLink system which were taken on that rare lucky for Smith day when Newton did not broke down the road.
    I feel very sorry for all of the companies including ours who have ever dealt with Smith. It’s now bankrupt, do not let yourself be fooled by these test bla bla bla stuff these numbers are never achieved since drivers are afraid of these vehicles due to their failures (imagine steering going off at 50 mph just as an example). I have never seen a real customer that was satisfied with Smith products. My judgement is based on 10 Smith vehicles bought in the last 3 years. There was and still is not a single one without a problem. They are not fixable – it’s design and engineering mistakes. Most case scenario – these vehicles take a lot of space in the garage and produce dust that covers them more and more every single day.

    1. GeorgeS says:

      sounds like a problem w/ execution. Not a problem with the concept.

      1. Anon says:

        Sounds like a lot of room for improvement. A well designed Tesla Truck could be unbeatable in a transportation sector that clearly needs it…

        1. TomArt says:

          Yeah, Tesla would not have those problems. They don’t now. And it sounds as if the existing battery packs would work, and battery swapping would even make sense.

          Tesla could provide someone with powertrains for their delivery truck gliders, just like they do for MB and Toyota.

    2. Mark H says:

      Very sad to hear. If you scraped it or retrofit to diesel, I know a lot of people here including myself that would be interested in buying your batteries.