The USPS needs 180,000 new delivery vehicles, automakers gearing up to bid
Jonathon Ramsey
Winning the New York City Taxi of Tomorrow tender was a huge prize for Nissan, even though the company is still working through the process of claiming its prize. The United States Postal Service has begun the process to take bids for a new delivery vehicle to replace the all-too-familiar Grumman Long Life Vehicle, and that will be a much larger plum for the automaker who wins it, perhaps worth more than six billion dollars.
The Grumman LLV is an aluminum body covering a Chevrolet S-10 pickup chassis and General Motors' Iron Duke four-cylinder engine. The USPS bought them from 1987 to 1994, and the 163,000 of them still in service are a monumental drain on postal resources: they get roughly ten miles to the gallon instead of the quoted 16 mpg, drink up more than $530 million in fuel each year, and their constant repair needs like the balky sliding door and leaky windshields have led the service to increase the annual maintenance budget from $100 million to $500 million. A seat belt is about as modern as it gets for safety technology, and the USPS says that assuming things stay the same, it can't afford to run them beyond 2017. Last year it put out two triage requests for proposals seeking 10,000 new chassis and drivetrains for the Grumman and 10,000 new vehicles.
The LLV is also too small for the modern mail system in which package delivery is growing and letter delivery is declining. The service says it doesn't have a fixed idea of the ideal "next-generation delivery vehicles," but it listed a number of requirements in its initial request and is open to any proposal. Carriers have some suggestions, though, saying they want better cupholders, sun visors that they can stuff letters behind, a driver's compartment free of slits that can swallow mail, and a backup camera.
The request for information sent to automakers pegs the tender at 180,000 vehicles that would cost between $25,000 and $35,000 apiece, and it will hold a conference on February 18 to answer questions about the contract. GM is the only domestic maker to avow an interest, while Ford and Fiat-Chrysler have remained cagey. Yet with a possible $6.3 billion up for grabs and some new vans for sale that would be advertised on every block in the country, we have a feeling everyone will be listening closely come February 18. We also have a feeling the LeMons series is going to be flooded with Grummans come 2017.News Source: Wall Street Journal, Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: TIM SLOAN/AFP/Getty ImagesGovernment/LegalChevroletChryslerFiatFordGMMinivan/VanTruckCommercial VehiclesSpecialtychevroletgeneral motorsgrummangrumman llvuspsI'm reporting this comment as:Rude or offensiveNot constructive / off-topicSexual contentSpam or misleadingOtherReported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.
This is a very custom order. It was 25 years ago and it is again today. USPS requires that the body be aluminum or composite for rust protection. They require both the cargo and driver to be sliding, not a normal hinged door. And it has to be right hand drive. That's just a few reasons why no existing consumer vehicle fits the bill. The custom build nature of it forces it to pretty much be one big order. They can pay a lot less per unit by ordering 25 years worth at once then they could buying just one year's worth. Also, since they bought them all at once last time, they need to do the same again because they are all going bad at once. another benefit is that al of there maintenance programs and parts inventory can switch over to one vehicle rather than stocking a progression of parts and education for various vehicles for each year's order.
The "custom" part is what gets (got) them in trouble. They don't need aluminum bodies because they should never again try to get 25 years out of a delivery vehicle. In the past decade they've spent more money trying to keep the LLV's on the road, than they would have spent just buying something new. They're doing frame swaps on many of the old trucks at about $10K each. That's an insane amount of money to put into a twenty-plus year old delivery vehicle. Not to mention the money they've wasted for fuel on those gas-pigs.
They don't need the sliders - if you notice that on the LLV's the sliding door isn't for cargo, it's for the driver! A hinged door there would do fine. The (left) door only needs to be able to open wide so the mail trays can be loaded. The parcels go in the back. Rolling doors or hatch there makes no difference.
Their only real "custom" requirement is that the cars be right hand drive. There are plenty of great choices for those that are already in production for European/JDM. I can't remember if any are still being made and exported from USA, but that wouldn't be an insurmountable issue.
The VMF's (postal garages) service multiple lines/types of vehicles now. Having a few different models of delivery vehicles would be a burden.
And if they bought something that somebody already made/makes - they could get replacements down the road. That's one of the big issues with the LLV's. They have to repair them no matter the cost, because they can't just go and order one.
These Grumman vans get 10 mpg instead of there rated 17 not because a defect or deception, but because of their route. Stop and go every 50-100 ft takes a lot more fuel than any EPA city mpg test. Any new gas postal van will see much worse mpgs than its rating. But an electric van with regenerative braking will do that stop and go duty very efficiently. That stop and go also takes a toll on the engine, transmission and brakes. Most of these vans are on their 3rd of 4th engine and transmission. An EV with regenerative braking and a single speed gearbox won't have any such durability issues. You just need the battery to have a decent liquid cooling system. These vans go 25 to 40 miles per day, perfect for an EV. With a battery pack of only about 20kw*hr, charging every night, you could probably keep the charge within the 20%-80% range that makes for long battery life. The USPS could buy a few vans with bigger batteries or even gas engines for the few longer routes it may have. They are looking at bidding $25-35,000 for each vehicle. That is a contract of $4.5 to $6.3 billion. That is a lot of volume, which could bring down the battery building cost through economy of scale. The USPS could even increase the bid a bit for an EV due to the "value added" from money saved later in fuel. of course they need to factor in the added cost of charging infrastructure, but they can also count on reducing their maintenance programs. This bid price sounds totally doable with an EV. Now is the time. This next generation fleet should last 20 years. That's 20 years of 100% domestic electric energy vs a mix of foreign and domestic oil. That's 20 years of fuel price volatility and contributing to global oil demand and price. That's 20 years of scratching of heads and asking, "Why in the world did we not get EVs?"
The original requirements by the USPS is for an aluminum body with sliding driver doors both at the cargo bay and driver door, and of course right hand drive. If they stick to those requirements, no existing vehicles EV or otherwise that I know of fit, the bill. This will be a custom job just as it was before. Current EV drivetrains do have sufficient power and torque to carry heavy loads. One possibility is for GM to use their batteries and bolt a custom aluminum body onto a canyon chassis. GM is also rebadging the Nissan NV as the "City Express" It's possible, but unlikely, that Nissan could build a modified aluminum version.
Cesar,
Oh, I see. Some company developed an EV delivery van and sold a bunch to FedEx and Frito Lay. I don't know if its drivetrain is powerful enough for a dump truck. You probably would not be able to bolt in any existing EV drivetrain completely unmodified, but a lot less modification is needed, I think, compared to ICE drivetrains. For 180,000 units a custom setup would be warranted. Garbage trucks have at most, 400 hp. A Tesla S P85, for example, has batteries and controllers that provide sufficient power. You just need to pick a gear ratio that gives you the most available low end torque but only needs to get you up to 55 mph. You might consider putting in a bigger motor for more torque. Adding battery capacity might be preferable to lower the strain on the cells of constant stop and go, juice in, juice out.
Upvote from me; you make a lot of great points. I wonder what the expense would be, however, for the postal service to install the charging infrastructure for a fleet of 180,000 all-electric vehicles. That certainly needs to be part of the calculation, and it may not be as simple as "average charger is $XXXX times 180,000 units." Electrical service to facilities may need to be upgraded, and the physical layout of the overnight storage lots might have to be altered for security, safety, or efficiency.
You know, this could be a very interesting [side?] gig for Tesla. A buy that large could bring down battery R&D and manufacturing costs, more research and manufacturing jobs for Americans perhaps at their upcoming NV factory, and it could potentially result in the lower-cost EV model Tesla seems to be working towards
If Tesla can get their gigafactory built and running quickly enough, this may be a good contract for them. They already work with aluminum, and they need to generate battery volume. it would be much more than a side job.
That is interesting, but Tesla already have their hands full with the Model X and 3 development. And where would they find the cells for 180,000 vehicles? They can barely get enough 18650 cells from Panasonic as it is for the Model S, and the Gigafactory won't be ready in time.
Tesla to stay afloat sells their fleet energy credits to the other car companies. There is no way they could be competitive without those credits and if they are spreading it over 180,000 vehicles.... Tesla is a testament to a company that only survives because of government policy. If GM gets this bid and it would be an electric vehicle GM would not have to purchase from Tesla the fleet energy credits thus the price of a Tesla would have to go up and their sales would nose dive.
Don't forget the USPS is one the largest building owners in the United States, solar panels and micro wind turbines could mean zero charging energy. Not to mention the extra juice left over in all those parked vehicles could help power the actual post office. The future is electric for the USPS.
ideally, yes but many rural routes do hundreds of miles a day instead of dozens. Most mail trucks drive much, much more than 40 miles a day! also EVs have so many non serviceable parts. battery acting up? replace it. something wrong with the drive unit? replace it. i can see a strong case for a hybrid considering they will put the miles on the vehicle to get the return on the additional cost. however there is no current hybrid work vehicle on the market fit for postal duty. I don't see EVs for heavy use work vehicles coming any time soon. especially when you consider how much downtime it would take to charge it, you can refuel IC engine in 20 minutes or left but even with quick charging it would take hours for the EV.
out of all of the vehicles on the market a relatively base model ford transit ( the big one) with the medium roof and the CNG/LPG fuel option, interior upgrade package, rear door glass and passenger glass, rear window defrost. power, long arm mirrors with turn signals and heated. crew chief telemetry. Sticker price is right at $36,000 street price at a dealer is about 33,000. so that is well within the budget even without whatever deal you get with the government fleet bulk discount. my guess would be $31,500 this is currently the best postman vehicle on the market right now. (within budget constraints) i'm sure they will save lots of money of fuel even with the 20mpg highway i'm sure those leaky iron dukes on life support would struggle to break into the double digits on mpg i can't image the transit getting worse than 15mpg on a bad day. The transit will have even more space so everything can be organized even better
a transit connect WOULD work if only the rear cargo was accessible from the front. the Chevy city express actually would be a good candidate for smaller routes if you took out the passenger seat to make getting to the back easier. that would be a lot cheaper but limited on cargo capacity compared to the LLV Maybe if they equip all of their mail trucks with the LPG, CNG capability they can take advantage of that source of alternative fuel in areas where it is readily available.
0 comments:
Post a Comment