What happened to Nikola One Semi?

macribs

10 MW
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
3,702
Back when we first read about the Nikola One they claimed it should have around 2.000 horsepower. And should be out by 2018.
I've been reading everything Nikola since then. Because I really want them do turn around the tractor trailer market and get the green shift movement also for heavy hauling.

I've seen several deals signed and various companies have already ordered big numbers of Nikola One. They got a deal for the H2 filling station in place and I really thought things should speed up from there. But seems things kind of slowed down. Been months since I've read anything about them. Except for this summer I think, then there was speculation of delivery in 2021.

But since the first unveiling and spec leaks things have changed. Now they are down to half that output. Only 1.000 horsepower. Still big numbers and considering the torque I am sure it will be plenty when geared down before each wheel. The hefty specs are not as hefty any more. And the production seems to be pushed forward.

How are things moving with Nikola? Why did they reduce the specs?

Can Tesla Semi beat Nikola to market? For me I don't care who is first I hope to see the change in the industry. But I must say I really hope they don't go sensible when it comes to motor output. I was really looking forward to see big rigs climb mountain passes like a billy goat. And faster acceleration and more torque is only a good thing from where I stand.When then move towards electric propulsion happens the days of frustration when being stuck behind a heavy hauler on small narrow roads might be over. I cross my fingers the big numbers they once claimed will be an option and that we will see loads of them on the road.

Anyone know more about the Nikola? Maybe launch date? That company they signed up with for manufacturing and assembly are they still going strong?
 
Once drivers are eliminated, the need for 'big' rigs will only be for things that can't be broken into smaller pieces.
 
I like autonomous vehicles as much as the next guy but I do not think they will change the market situation. We will still need the cargo to be lugged around to reach local stores and outlets. And they way we do that today is not really sustainable. Those big diesel are making the world a little bit worse every day. I hope we will see the change to electric haulers change much faster then with electric cars.

On a side note I think we also should enforce a much stricter weight limitation on big rigs. In my country they can weigh in at 60 metric tons. The weight of 30 Tesla's. The wear down of road surface is for the most part due to the heavy cargo load from heavy haulers. They are causing close to 90% of the wear and tear of our roads. Ideally we should get more cargo on railroads but sadly I don't see that happen any time soon.
 
Keeping the weight down is going to be tricky with battery powered semi's using available battery tech'.
Even if they are only 1000hp, 750kw, but only using 500kW on average,.....
...for a reasonable range of say, 4 hours, that would need about 10,000kg of battery alone, before any of the other power train and running gear weight.
But of course , lower load weights would need less power and hence less battery for the same range.
 
gogo said:
Once drivers are eliminated, the need for 'big' rigs will only be for things that can't be broken into smaller pieces.
I think the trend will be towards the largest trucks that can fit on the roads. (Look at Australia.) The larger the truck, the more economical it is to transport a pound of cargo contained within - driver or not.

I also think that highway electrification will be the thing that makes electric trucks possible. They'll carry 20 miles or so of batteries, and the rest will be provided by catenary wires. Much cheaper/easier than all those batteries.
 
I have worked as an 18-wheel driver in the past, and here's my take on this. Years ago, truck drivers took speed/meth and would drive for several days. They got away with this by keeping two sets of books, and if stopped by the Highway Patrol, they would grab the book that showed they had been driving for less than 10 hours. Now, the insurance industry has pushed interstate trucks to have GPS and electronic interweb-based communications.

Every so often, a truck has to be weighed to make sure they are not carrying too heavy of a load (you get paid by the weight of the cargo, so...more weight, more money. But a too-heavy truck accelerates the breakdown of the roads). However, now you can get weighed at the beginning of your trip, and as long as your GPS indicates you have stayed at speed on the highway (meaning you didn't stop along the way to add more weight), then you can pass-up the remaining scales (no waiting in line).

Many cross-country trucks carry two drivers, so one drives while the other sleeps. Aside from meals, showers, and fueling...the truck is close to driving continuously. The new autonomous trucks mean that a cross-country truck can run continuously with one driver, and that driver will be paid less because that drivers' job will be easier. I suspect their warehouse depots will have hot-swappable batteries.

Mines are also another place where there is a push for autonomous trucks. They are typically located in the middle of nowhere, and it's hard to find good drivers who are willing to live nearby. I could be wrong, but that's what I imagine will be the low-hanging fruit.
 
Hillhater said:
Keeping the weight down is going to be tricky with battery powered semi's using available battery tech'.
Even if they are only 1000hp, 750kw, but only using 500kW on average,.....
...for a reasonable range of say, 4 hours, that would need about 10,000kg of battery alone, before any of the other power train and running gear weight.
But of course , lower load weights would need less power and hence less battery for the same range.

For the Nikola One the huge battery pack is not an issue because of the H2. I think the battery pack on the Nikola is about 3-4 times bigger then a Tesla S car. So less then a ton in weight, cooling and heating included. And that is also why I kind of got really disappointed when I realized the early claims of peak power of 2.000 HP suddenly was cut in half. As the hydrogen is what is keeping the range for the Semi, there should be no need to be sensible and keep horse power to a boring 1.000? I cross my fingers that the final version will be like the first specs said. With 2.000 HP.

For the Tesla Semi you are spot on. The range on battery alone will suffer but afaik they are not targeting the long haul market, at least not in the start. Can't remember if they claimed 4-500 km of range with the Tesla Semi. In EU with the demanded driver breaks and rests it might actually be enough.
 
spinningmagnets said:
Mines are also another place where there is a push for autonomous trucks. They are typically located in the middle of nowhere, and it's hard to find good drivers who are willing to live nearby. I could be wrong, but that's what I imagine will be the low-hanging fruit.

Autonamous (driverless) haul trucks are already in use in mines here..
https://thewest.com.au/business/mining/rio-tintos-driverless-trucks-program-shifts-gear-to-make-pilbara-mine-full-auto-ng-b88693612z
 
billvon said:
gogo said:
Once drivers are eliminated, the need for 'big' rigs will only be for things that can't be broken into smaller pieces.
I think the trend will be towards the largest trucks that can fit on the roads. (Look at Australia.) The larger the truck, the more economical it is to transport a pound of cargo contained within - driver or not.

I also think that highway electrification will be the thing that makes electric trucks possible. They'll carry 20 miles or so of batteries, and the rest will be provided by catenary wires. Much cheaper/easier than all those batteries.

I really hope we don't go all bonkers for the heavy haulers and allow even more weight and length. The more weight they carry the more the wear and tear of the road surface and the costs for keeping the infrastructure in good shape accumulates rather quick. Increasing max weight load will be costly for government budget. And we don't need more strain on those budgets.

The length they haul down under is not suited for EU with narrow, curvy mountain passes and long steep climbs. Passing such long vehicles will be even more demanding for other vehicles and that might result in more accidents.

As for highway electrification that might work on some roads with heavy traffic and stable weather. Where I live probably will not work, too much remote areas and to much cold weather, road salting etc.

I think the most important thing is to get those semi's to the market. Give haulers and option to go green. Batteries will improve over time. Weight and volume of those cells will decrease and 5 years or 10 years from now hopefully you will get twice the capacity at 1/3 of the volume and weight we see today.
 
macribs said:
I really hope we don't go all bonkers for the heavy haulers and allow even more weight and length. The more weight they carry the more the wear and tear of the road surface and the costs for keeping the infrastructure in good shape accumulates rather quick. Increasing max weight load will be costly for government budget. And we don't need more strain on those budgets.

Agreed - with the caveat that the damage done is caused by weight per wheel. Double the number of wheels and the damage is reduced by more than a factor of 2 (since it's not linear.) So if you do road trains similar to Australia's, road damage doesn't increase - but if you allow heavier trucks with the same number of wheels, it does.

A way to _reduce_ road damage might be to allow road trains, but reduce the load allowed per wheel (usually expressed as load per axle, assuming 4 wheels.) That way you get more hauling per vehicle, more efficiency, but less road damage.

As for highway electrification that might work on some roads with heavy traffic and stable weather. Where I live probably will not work, too much remote areas and to much cold weather, road salting etc.
Road salting wouldn't be an issue. Weather might (freezing rain for example.) At best you'd put them on the major highways and rely on on-board power for local deliveries.
 
Long haul / interstate / Outback applications are an extreme case of truck use and the one least-suited to a BEV.

Urban delivery trucks are well suited, running for long hours, lots of stop-starts but accumulating relatively few miles, but tend to be smaller than a semi. There are some semi trucks that just make regular back-and-worth runs between a few fixed places, like a docks or rail terminal and a distribution centre, where the distance is maybe 100-200 miles and there's time to charge between runs (waiting to offload, or waiting for the next boat to come in).

On battery required, it's more about aerodynamics than weight unless climbing. A diesel semi-truck averages around 10mpg when cruising (approx 55mph) suggesting a healthy ~200HP. I think 500kW is a gross over-estimate for level cruising for a typical semi-truck.

Searching for power used by a truck turns up surprisingly few answers. This article on the Tesla semi suggests 500kWh battery gives a range of 150 miles. Assuming ~50mph that's ~165kW (~220HP).

Ergo, 0.5 - 1.0 MWh battery would be sufficient for short haul applications (150-300 miles) and would weigh, based on the Model S battery, approx. 3.2 - 6.4 tons.
 
Dont forget about regen. A 60,000 pound machine hurtling down a hill @ 60mph can fully recharge a 400v 150 ah pack pretty quick. We were using LTO's on several of our prototype platforms due to their higher c rate. We tried 300, 400, and even a few 700 volt( :bigthumb: ) pack designs during the testing phase...Managing charge/discharge assist per elevation changes every moment, mantaining state of charge, and managing charge /discharge rate becomes an interesting nut to crack.

The other more immediate obstacle is batteries. the sheer quantity required to shift the trucking industry to electric is not sitting somewhere in inventory. Battery manufacturers will only ramp once they have evaluated, vetted and mitigated the ecosystem risk across stakeholders.
 
Lenk42602 said:
Dont forget about regen. A 60,000 pound machine hurtling down a hill @ 60mph can fully recharge a 400v 150 ah pack pretty quick. We were using LTO's on several of our prototype platforms due to their higher c rate. We tried 300, 400, and even a few 700 volt( :bigthumb: ) pack designs during the testing phase...Managing charge/discharge assist per elevation changes every moment, mantaining state of charge, and managing charge /discharge rate becomes an interesting nut to crack.

Yeah where I live max total vehicle weight is 60 tons, so about 120 000 pound fully loaded. We also got mountain passes, and various heights above sea level for our roads. So lots of climbing and descending, so the regen will be able to put back energy for sure. Only downer is that you will use more energy climbing up the mountain then you get back descending the other side.

As we got pretty rules for professional long haul drivers regarding driving hours, and mandatory breaks and rests a network of super chargers might actually go a long way. Not to mention ability to charge at loading points.
 
Finally some more news about Nikola. This time the new Nikola Tre. Tre being the Norwegian word for 3.
Seems it will manufactured in EU for the EU market. A true stub nose as we need in the EU due to overall length being measured from the very front of the vehicle to the very aft. Bumper to bumper. No room for a large nose as that eats away cargo capacity. Here it might haul loads up to total vehicle weight of 60 tons max for certain roads or the more usual limit 50 tons.

Looking good, I hop we will see many of this on the roads in the future. I guess they need to add another rear axle, and that axle will need ability to be lifted at will to enhance grip on slippery winter roads in icy and snowy conditions. But the rendering seems like a great start.

IRpZY4J.jpg
 
Well yeah you are correct. But remember it got H2 as energy source. So cw value is not as important as load capacity. Because of the road standards with high elevations and smaller more narrow roads they can be twisty as fcuk so the length restrictions are there for a reason. When you need to drive a snub nose to make money aerodynamics really can't take much of your focus.
 
Looks like they have just copied a stock (modern) rig design to install their drive package in.
And where i wonder, is that hydrogen tank, fuel cell, controll systems, etc etc ..all packaged now that they seem to have reverted to a standard cab tractor configuration ??
And,.. How come after years of development , promotion, and supposed sales,...all we have is a rendering ??
 
Lenk42602 said:
Dont forget about regen. A 60,000 pound machine hurtling down a hill @ 60mph can fully recharge a 400v 150 ah pack pretty quick. We were using LTO's on several of our prototype platforms due to their higher c rate. We tried 300, 400, and even a few 700 volt( :bigthumb: ) pack designs during the testing phase...Managing charge/discharge assist per elevation changes every moment, mantaining state of charge, and managing charge /discharge rate becomes an interesting nut to crack.

The other more immediate obstacle is batteries. the sheer quantity required to shift the trucking industry to electric is not sitting somewhere in inventory. Battery manufacturers will only ramp once they have evaluated, vetted and mitigated the ecosystem risk across stakeholders.

It drives me crazy to have to slam on the air brakes and come to a dead stop in my 54,000 lb. crane truck. I drive looking way ahead, in order not to, but you just can't hit all the lights. All that wasted energy, burned up in heat/friction and noise (jake brake). This, as compared to my plug in Prius, where a red light makes me giggle as I see the range remaining go up a few tenths of a mile. It's always a kinky thrill to park the truck and get in the Prius for the drive home, it's like a technological jump of many, many decades, and the Prius is 5 years old.
 
macribs said:
Well yeah you are correct. But remember it got H2 as energy source. So cw value is not as important as load capacity. Because of the road standards with high elevations and smaller more narrow roads they can be twisty as fcuk so the length restrictions are there for a reason. When you need to drive a snub nose to make money aerodynamics really can't take much of your focus.

But if it's not energy efficient, and relies on "dirty" hydrogen, then other than reduced mechanical complexity (increased infrastructure complexity), why would anyone go for it ?

To elaborate, I believe Nikola has the design of a locomotive - H2 fuel cell doesn't produce enough power to handle the acceleration load, instead Lithium Ion pack is charged from H2, and is used to accelerate the truck to the cruising speed, at which point H2 has sufficient output to maintain the cruise and also slowly recharge the battery pack. Obviously regenerative breaking allows to repeat the process many times without waiting for H2 to do its thing.

Then, the fact is current H2 production mostly relies on Natural Gas. At which point, other than carbon trapping, one should ask - what's the point of going through all the trouble if we're still dependent on fossil fuel to keep this weird thing on the road ?

Combine that with EU's enviro-consciousness, this entire thing makes no sense to me.
 
They ought to focus on converting all the busses, delivery trucks, garbage trucks, taxis, etc and other city bound vehicles to EVs first..before they work on the long haul freight trucks.
Those could easily be converted to fun on CNG or even Hydrogen , in conventional IC drivetrains,. Whilst they figure out the best options for electric drive ..( battery, fuel cell, external gantry supply, etc)
At least that way you clean up the city's air , eliminate those diesel emissions on the highways, and conserve fossil fuel for a rainy day. !
 
Hillhater said:
They ought to focus on converting all the busses, delivery trucks, garbage trucks, taxis, etc and other city bound vehicles to EVs first..before they work on the long haul freight trucks.
Those could easily be converted to fun on CNG or even Hydrogen , in conventional IC drivetrains,. Whilst they figure out the best options for electric drive ..( battery, fuel cell, external gantry supply, etc)
At least that way you clean up the city's air , eliminate those diesel emissions on the highways, and conserve fossil fuel for a rainy day. !

Vehicles aren't expendable. Just because there is a greener and more practical alternative available doesn't mean all existing vehicles in class will get scrapped. That's where it makes sense to develop vehicles of all classes in parallel, and let the fleets upgrade organically.

To add, startups can't really engage in many projects simultaneously. That's where going after specific underrepresented segments makes sense. Many companies make passenger EVs, nobody was making Semis when Nikola entered the market.
 
Luckily we already see a big change in city buses at least in EU. More and more cities are committing to go electric for city buses, and it will help a lot with pollution. Taxi cabs is also slowly moving towards the electric and in a few years with even better batteries I think that will increase.

For semi trucks like Nikola it it important to remember that not all heavy haulers have nationwide routes or intercontinental routes. Many also go local or semi local. And they do contribute to smog and bad air. The change to H2 is a start. While we wait for more advanced batteries. Just because H2 is not optimal solution it is still way better then diesel fuel. Less particles and less smog.

H2 can come from many sources. In the future as the market for H2 grows I think we will see more and greener alternatives. By all means, H2 is still not the solution for the future, because of its energy losses. But it might be the interim solution we need today. We got to start somewhere. Ignoring the problem any longer does solve a damn thing.
 
One thing to remember is that it is not all about the stretching the dollar the furthest all the time. Mane companies buying transportation services are starting to feel pressured to choose a more green alternative the the standard diesel semi trucks. As of today there are not really good options for anything but the very local routes. With the Nikola Semi trucks at least there is an option for businesses that are looking for a more sustainable fleet, or part of a fleet.

In the end, we as the the consumer are really the ones with the power to enforce changes. IF we get more vocal about what we will support by carefully choosing with our wallets we are also putting pressures on companies to address the pollution and we make them feel obligated to get started on the green change. Tomorrow that means H2 in heavy haulers and tractor trucks. Then week after we might be in a place where it can be done fully electric.

As a fully electric tractor truck will need a huge battery pack, that is not all bad. Huge size and cell count also means rooms for great cooling and thereby rapid charging solutions. Bmw et al are currently pushing for 800 V super charging. Maybe heavy haulers will push past 1000 V? Maybe we will see the semi truck super chargers with gigantic battery banks in order to be able to push charge fast enough. How this will play out we don't know yet, great people all over the world are working day and night to solve this. And it will be solved. In the meantime H2 is a great solution for today.
 
Sorry, i think there is a missunderstanding...
Waiting for Nikola or Tesla , VW, or any other full EV heavy transport is an idealistic attitude.
As hinted in the thread title, I also am not convinced Nikola will ever get beyond trials, prototypes etc, and timescales of others is vague.
Diesel ICE trucks could be converted to be fueled by cleaner, cheaper, Established CNG, or super clean H2 combustion ,..very quickly, whilst the EV technology, batteries, charging, etc are developed.......but for some reason , there doesnt appear to be much desire to clean up via that route ?
 
Hillhater said:
Sorry, i think there is a missunderstanding...
Waiting for Nikola or Tesla , VW, or any other full EV heavy transport is an idealistic attitude.
As hinted in the thread title, I also am not convinced Nikola will ever get beyond trials, prototypes etc, and timescales of others is vague.
Diesel ICE trucks could be converted to be fueled by cleaner, cheaper, Established CNG, or super clean H2 combustion ,..very quickly, whilst the EV technology, batteries, charging, etc are developed.......but for some reason , there doesnt appear to be much desire to clean up via that route ?

CNG pretty much runs in the same engines as gasoline. How many semis have you seen running on gasoline ? H2 combustion has its own issues. Bottom line is R&D is quite involved for this one, it totally makes sense to skip intermediate solutions and aim for the ultimate ones.
 
Back
Top