Chevy Silverado EV Drives 1,059.2 Miles on a Single Charge, Surpassing World Record (theverge.com) 101
"General Motors claimed a new world record for EV driving on a single charge," reports the Verge, "after a Chevy Silverado EV traveled 1,059.2 miles without recharging its battery."
The potentially record-breaking run took place over seven days on public roads near GM's Milford Proving Ground and Detroit's Belle Isle "using smart driving techniques" that included limiting the speed to 20-25 mph. The truck was a 2026 Chevy Silverado EV Work Truck with an EPA-estimated range of 493 miles. But by making a number of adjustments, GM's engineers were able to far surpass the vehicle's estimated range...
First of all, the test was conducted in the summer for "optimum ambient temperature for battery efficiency," GM says. They also lowered the windshield wiper blades to reduce drag, inflated the tires to the highest acceptable pressure for lower rolling resistance, removed the spare tire to lighten the load, and optimized the wheel alignment. A tonneau cover was added to the truck bed for smoother airflow, and climate control was turned off for the duration of the test.
GM isn't seeking the Guinness World Records, the article adds, with a GM spokesperson calling it "a passion project led and executed by GM engineers." (The test "started out as casual conversation among a group of GM engineers in late 2024," GM says, but "quickly turned into a challenge: How far could the Work Truck go if we optimized absolutely everything?")
After the test, reports Motor Trend, "The dead truck was hauled back to Milford, its battery was topped up, and the energy used to power a Stratasys F370 3D printer, which spent 6.5 hours printing an ABS plastic trophy to commemorate the auspicious event."
First of all, the test was conducted in the summer for "optimum ambient temperature for battery efficiency," GM says. They also lowered the windshield wiper blades to reduce drag, inflated the tires to the highest acceptable pressure for lower rolling resistance, removed the spare tire to lighten the load, and optimized the wheel alignment. A tonneau cover was added to the truck bed for smoother airflow, and climate control was turned off for the duration of the test.
GM isn't seeking the Guinness World Records, the article adds, with a GM spokesperson calling it "a passion project led and executed by GM engineers." (The test "started out as casual conversation among a group of GM engineers in late 2024," GM says, but "quickly turned into a challenge: How far could the Work Truck go if we optimized absolutely everything?")
After the test, reports Motor Trend, "The dead truck was hauled back to Milford, its battery was topped up, and the energy used to power a Stratasys F370 3D printer, which spent 6.5 hours printing an ABS plastic trophy to commemorate the auspicious event."
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure I learned the same thing and then later in life you learn while its still cool but that thing was basically made out of paper and balsa wood and could only do that with a 90lb teenager as the single passenger
Re: (Score:2)
If you go slow enough it's always possible. E.g. drive for 1 hour, stop for the next 2 days to charge.
But this limitation is irrelevant. You put solar panels and batteries along the route, and then use those to charge your car. No reason to take the panels with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, that's the real key to the inevitability of EVs, they don't care where the electricity comes from.
I know the kid. (Score:1)
His name is Charles Bankowitz and was my neighbor. Reason I say "was" is because after that article came out he got visited by very official looking men and was taken away. Eventually I learned that G-men and oil execs made him sign away the patent and IP, and have been keeping him in solitary confinement so he does not leak the tech to the world.
Re: I know the kid. (Score:2)
Eventually I learned that G-men and oil execs made him sign away the patent and IP, and have been keeping him in solitary confinement so he does not leak the tech to the world.
Really?
That's hard to believe. "g-men"? "Oil Execs"?
Seriously?
That reminds me of the story of the guy that designed a miraculous carburetor the "the boys from Detroit" bought and buried...
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
We know the anti-EV crowd keeps moving the goalposts. We keep hearing "the range isn't enough", only the ranges keep improving and this experiment shows that they'll continue to do so. The charging times keep improving, but the nay-sayers keep saying they're too long. Charger availability keeps improving, but all we hear is that there aren't enough. Charger reliability is going up but there's an endless litany of anecdotes about broken chargers everywhere. Bonus complaints about tires causing pollution because EVs are heavy, as if the Ford Earth Destroyer SUVs don't weigh more.
We get it. Progress in EVs isn't impressive to you. Gotcha. Don't care.
Re: (Score:3)
We keep hearing "the range isn't enough", only the ranges keep improving and this experiment shows that they'll continue to do so.
Actually, this "experiment" was more of a demonstration of what was already well-known about EVs: 20 to 25MPH is the efficiency sweet spot. It's basically as fast as you can go before wind resistance starts appreciably eating away at your range.
I follow the Chevy Bolt subreddit, and every once in awhile someone picks up one used as their first EV and launches into a rant about how they get nowhere near the EPA rating of roughly 240 miles per charge. Well, the devil's in the details - climate control can e
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot of folks who are unwilling to crawl along in the rightmost lane to keep their efficiency numbers up.
I'd be profoundly happy if slow traffic kept right like they are supposed to. That scenario in no way resembles the real world around here.
Re: So? (Score:2)
How happy would it make me if (some) drivers didn't honk or flash their lights at me as I drive 40-50 in the right lane?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It has been getting better over the last 15 years. Have you been living under a rock?
I didn't say it wasn't getting better. I said it is not getting better very quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
It has been getting better over the last 15 years. Have you been living under a rock?
I didn't say it wasn't getting better. I said it is not getting better very quickly.
"Very quickly" is a relative term.
Doing a quick search for the charging curve for a 2016 Chevy Bolt, which was very popular and close to entry-level at the time, it peaked out at 55kw of draw, and did that up to about 50% battery then steadily went downwards. Just shy of 2.5 hours to get to 100% with DC fast charging. That bought you an estimated 238 miles of range. Admittedly this was always considered crappy performance but not enough to stop the car from being very popular.
Now compare to a 2025 Io
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok so with an ICE you can spend 5 minutes filling up and get 500km of driving. Extrapolate on your numbers and tell me when EVs can get 100km of charge every minute, or at least don't require a charge during the day and every affordable hotel will let you charge at night.
No. You don't get credit for that. You have - once again - moved the goalposts.
The topic was "it is not getting better very quickly". I demonstrated that to be false. You don't get to pull "it still isn't good enough for me" as a measure of the speed of improvement.
You're pretty clearly going to be one of those people who when 5 minutes charging gets 500km of distance, you'll disregard that you ever posted this.
Please keep in mind that "I need to drive across the planet, every day, non-stop" isn't
Re: (Score:2)
You are moving the goalposts on me. You asked me what I meant about getting better and I told you and now your are saying my answer isn
Re: (Score:2)
What IS normal is being able to add 100km of distance in 1 minute.
That is a normal measure of fueling rate on a ICE. It isn't a normal measure of how people drive, which is the context of the sentence you're replying to.
Now EVs are coming in to compete and I expect something competitive. This is how capitalism works. Gone are the days where the next new things only needed to beat a horse.
One: they are competitive, for most use cases.
Two: being significantly better in several metric while irrelevantly worse in a couple doesn't matter for most people.
Three: the only thing EVs need to beat - long term - is stubborn people.
Four: I have already granted in this topic that EVs aren't superior or ideal for every use-case. That's a given. Gra
Re: (Score:2)
That is a normal measure of fueling rate on a ICE. It isn't a normal measure of how people drive, which is the context of the sentence you're replying to.
The problem with the normal measure of how people drive is that you are talking about a statistical 'normal'. It's like saying people normally have 1.5 kids. No one actually has 1.5 kids, like no one adheres to your idea of normal driving all the time.
I have already granted in this topic that EVs aren't superior or ideal for every use-case.
Thank you, because that's all I'm trying to get across.
Very quaint. Once again we get into interesting things. Taking a look at some USDOT status from 2018, ~60% of trips... under 6 miles from home. Another ~17%... under 10. Another ~8%... under 15. Another boop, boop, boop three measurements on the graph working out to ~15%... under 30. Meaning - and I quote - 95% 30 miles or less. Now, I get it. With 200+ million drivers in the US there are a statistically significant number of people and trips exceeding that 30 miles. Sure. But to pretend that being not-actually-tethered to one's home is some kind of hardship is so over-the-top exaggeration. This range anxiety crap isn't based on reality. Again, given there are a non-zero number of exceptions.
Why do EV proponents keep telling me it's "ok" that I won't be inconvenienced for most drives? If I'm spending $30K plus, is it not reasonable that I am never inconvenienced? Can I not be the judge of
Re: (Score:2)
We do that because people have been telling us it's "getting better" for 15 years but considering how far away they are still it will be another 60 years before EVs are anywhere near the convenience and reliability of ICEs.
You didn't specifically say it wasn't quickly, just some blather about 60 years that was completely vague and ill-defined.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are welcome to present your own analysis. You are the expert, after all.
No analysis required as it's a failure in your statements that is the issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So? (Score:4, Interesting)
Convenience depends on what you do. But EVs are are much more reliable and safer than gas cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me that when it's 30c below and you are out of power on the highway.
Gladly. I'll crack open the door, knock on the door of your out-of-fuel ICE car and tell you.
Incidentally... I live in Canada and we haven't recorded a day that cold in the city where I live since 1973. Also... I was watching my climate-control consumption last winter. I can run somewhere between two and four days on a full charge, depending on how cold it is and how warm you want it.
Point is this is a non-argument.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
My neighbor is a general contractor. As in, he owns the general contracting business and is the license holder for the company's operation. As the GC he's either visiting the various jobs around the state that his company has contracts for, checking up on the work of the subs, meeting with the customers, meeting with the inspectors, sometimes acting as part of the demolitions or cleanup or gofer crew depending on if there's something that needs to be done that isn't strictly covered by the various subs or needs to be done post-haste. This calls for driving a lot of miles. He doesn't need a heavy truck, but he definitely needs a truck.
He just bought one of these Silverado 4WT trucks, and installed a 50A charging circuit at home as the main panel is right on the other side the wall of the garage from where he parks. He charges at home and so far for work, has not had to use a charging station anywhere else. He's pleased as punch.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Our friend owns a roofing company and bought a Cybertruck. Not only does it do everything he needs but it does it better than the F-150s he formerly used. He sold one of the Fords and bought another Tesla it was so much better for his needs.
Re: (Score:1)
Tesla Model XXX?
Re: (Score:2)
The charging times keep improving, but the nay-sayers keep saying they're too long.
It's not how fast you can push power from the charger into your car, it's how fast the charging stop can push the power it receives into all of the cars that are plugged in. If you have a 250kWh battery, and you're alone at a charging facility that's getting 500kW delivered to it by the grid, you can charge your car empty to full in a half hour if your car and the charger support delivering the power that fast; if the chargers can only deliver 250kW, then it's an hour for that charge. If there's another car
Re: (Score:2)
The charging times keep improving, but the nay-sayers keep saying they're too long.
It's not how fast you can push power from the charger into your car, it's how fast the charging stop can push the power it receives into all of the cars that are plugged in. If you have a 250kWh battery, and you're alone at a charging facility that's getting 500kW delivered to it by the grid, you can charge your car empty to full in a half hour if your car and the charger support delivering the power that fast; if the chargers can only deliver 250kW, then it's an hour for that charge. If there's another car there, your charging time doubles to an hour (but remains an hour if the chargers can only deliver 250kW). Four cars, and it's now two hours. If the charging facility is getting a megawatt off the grid, you can cut those times in half -- but the company that builds the charging facility isn't going to settle for four charging stations if they've got a megawatt tap on the grid; they're going to put in eight, or sixteen, sharing out the delivered power among all the vehicles sucking down charge -- and as the greens' pie-in-the-sky wholesale transition to EVs makes for more of them on the road, you're going to be sharing a charging stop with many more cars -- and getting a smaller share of the pipe the developer installed.
This is true... sort of. But it's also relatively unusual. The stations I've been involved with charge by the total kW consumed. There's no incentive to have more, slower station, so they're generally sized for what the place can provide. And again... this infrastructure is continually improving.
The "pie-in-the-sky wholesale transition to EVs" exists only in the minds of regressives. Almost all pro-EV advocates (myself included) recognize two fundamental truths. 1} best-case-scenario (ie. the unnece
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that range would be MUCH less of an issue if the batteries could be charged rapidly... and if they can't, they need to be swappable. Honestly, they should be swappable anyways. Battery tech is is changing rapidly. I would like to change my batteries along with it.
But, as long as I have to sit somewhere for a few hours every couple hundred miles, current EVs are utterly worthless. Call it range anxiety or whatever the hell you want. The waiting is the core of the issue.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that range would be MUCH less of an issue if the batteries could be charged rapidly... and if they can't, they need to be swappable. Honestly, they should be swappable anyways. Battery tech is is changing rapidly. I would like to change my batteries along with it.
But, as long as I have to sit somewhere for a few hours every couple hundred miles, current EVs are utterly worthless. Call it range anxiety or whatever the hell you want. The waiting is the core of the issue.
That's not the reality of current cars. It just isn't.
Mine adds ~200km of range in 13 minutes. Means very close to 10% of time spent charging. Drive 10 hours and you need to charge for about 1 hour. Drive 20 hours and you need to charge for about 2 hours. And mine's a performance model, not remotely optimized for range.
Doesn't seem so onerous when it's laid out that way, does it? Dramatically different from "few hours" (ie. about 3) every "couple hundred miles" (ie. about 3 hours of driving). 1:1
Re: (Score:2)
That car wasn't going to happen in production, either.
Though, this one was a production vehicle -- with customized wipers, way-over-inflated tires, no spare tire, re-aligned wheels, and an add-on tonneau cover, that you can only drive in the summer, w/o the A/C, at a max speed of 25 MPH. Luxury! :-)
Re: (Score:2)
That car wasn't going to happen in production, either
They used a production care for this. You can go buy this one right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So? This is News for Nerds. When did we get so grumpy? When did we get so jaded? When did pushing tech to its limits become looked down on?
The world needs more engineers and tinkerers doing crazy shit just because they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Good (Score:2)
It's good that they're doing this testing. This won't affect the current product, but it might well contribute to design considerations for future products.
They should also look at what happens with more realistic driving speeds for other parts of the country, see if any of the other simple changes contribute much compared to typical battery mileage.
Re: (Score:2)
It's good that they're doing this testing. This won't affect the current product, but it might well contribute to design considerations for future products.
Sure. Like they'll start selling cars without spare tires or windshield wipers and a top speed of 25 mph. The test conditions are so artificial the results are completely divorced from reality, like the world record for number of consecutive dunks of a basketball while standing on a ladder. Entirely pointless.
Cars have been sold without spares for years as a weight saving device to get better CAFE results. While I agree the effort is far from real world conditions, improving aerodynamics vis things such as hidden windshield wipers. lower drag front ends instead of a billboard perpendicular to airflow, etc. will be key to EV mileage advances without having to wait for better batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree the effort is far from real world conditions, improving aerodynamics vis things such as hidden windshield wipers. lower drag front ends instead of a billboard perpendicular to airflow, etc. will be key to EV mileage advances without having to wait for better batteries.
Massively improving aerodynamics results in a car that looks like the Aptera. There's no free lunch.
So long as people want their cars and SUVs to look like, well, cars and SUVs, the laws of physics dictates that increased battery capacity is the only change they can realistically make. Everything else about modern EV drivetrains is already pretty damn efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree the effort is far from real world conditions, improving aerodynamics vis things such as hidden windshield wipers. lower drag front ends instead of a billboard perpendicular to airflow, etc. will be key to EV mileage advances without having to wait for better batteries.
Massively improving aerodynamics results in a car that looks like the Aptera. There's no free lunch.
Very true, but looking at the test mule Chevy used there are a lots of areas that could be improved without making the truck look like a Aptera. For example the headlights, rear view mirrors, front fascia angle, wheel arches. Even incremental changes that lowers the Cd would be helpful.
So long as people want their cars and SUVs to look like, well, cars and SUVs, the laws of physics dictates that increased battery capacity is the only change they can realistically make. Everything else about modern EV driv
Re: Good (Score:2)
Standard Response (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's get this out of the way before they all get here...
"It still won't satisfy my niche use case* therefore it's a complete waste and no-one should ever buy one. "
* A case that I made up and has never happened in real life
Re: Standard Response (Score:1)
Is Elon a republican?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is, most of the population in the world doesn't live in Canada and most Canadians do not travel long distances. When something is done by less than 5% of the population the use case is niche. 5% is the generally accepted definition of mainstream.
By the way I went camping to a sandy island only accessible by SUV a couple of times a year. I've never owned an SUV yet I still went anyway. How does your brain resolve this apparent dilemma? I also don't have a toe hitch on my current car which didn't
Re: (Score:1)
Ahh yes, "Stupid Opinion". People don't want to think the same way as you so they must be stupid, right?
Or the fact that electric doesn't cut it for a BUNCH of people. Mostly for those of us who actually WORK in our daily lives. And know what a "tow" receiver is, and not a "toe hitch". Or even those of us who DO actually tow things more than once a year. Amazing how many trailers you see behind people when your head isn't up your own ass.
But yeah, let me just buy something like 4-5 more trucks to always hav
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Detained by ICE. (Score:2)
>> Most people with a car will at least drive a few hours down to the US a few times a year.
Nah, that was last year.
Nobody in Canada wants to be detained by ICE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Standard Response (Score:4, Interesting)
My favourite was when a 15 minute delay on a 5 hour trip was going to cause them to miss their flight.
The reality is that battery tech is already good enough for most people and many commercial uses. Europe has EV trucks (as in big goods vehicles carrying 40 tonnes, not an F-150 wankpanzer) doing thousands of kilometres to make deliveries (which charging stops, obviously). Batteries continue to improve and get cheaper, charging continues to get faster.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It needs to tow a boat (Score:2)
EV trucks are absolutely fantastic for things like the trucks the cities used to drive around doing work or even a handful of small businesses.
But that range capacity basically collapses as soon as you tow a boat with it and the kind of person who is looking to buy one of these wants to tell a boat. Otherwise these are too expensive and people just stick with a gas-
Re: (Score:3)
Range will get there.
But we also need to deal with climate disaster or hauling a boat for funsies. Waaaaaay to many people in the latter category
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I bet you can *easily* tow a boat 300+ miles with an EV - at 20-25 mph.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't even have to be in real-world conditions, but the usefulness of the results is largely dependant on being able to compare it to other vehicles. Since I'm not aware of anyone else who does range-testing of their EVs at 20-25 mph etc, it's not very useful in that regard - I'm sure most EVs could post impressive range figures if driven slowly enough. With nothing to compare to, it's just a marketing stunt, though apparently a successful one, since we're talking about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, prior to reading this article, I didn't realize Chevy made any more electric vehicles after the Volt, so the advertisement is definitely working.
Now I just need some people who's owned one for 20 years and still loves it to convince me to buy one.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, prior to reading this article, I didn't realize Chevy made any more electric vehicles after the Volt, so the advertisement is definitely working.
They do, but car dealers being car dealers, they tend to promote the big spendy ICE trucks instead - because that's where the profit is.
Now I just need some people who's owned one for 20 years and still loves it to convince me to buy one.
Maybe if you ask Jay Leno really nicely. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because I'm currently driving a 15 year old ICE car with no problems at all, and my previous ICE car was 23 years old. And it was not broken. The state gave me $1000 to retire it.
To clarify, I don't need to see a 20-year-old Chevy EV. Any Chevy would do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Useless test (Score:5, Insightful)
"Cheating"...hmmm, isn't that why the manual that comes with a Silverado car mention that the range is 400-ish miles with normal use, as you state in your post?
And isn't this an article of GM engineers trying to get as far as possible with just 1 charge, just for "funsies"/bragging rights?
Question becomes, why are your panties in a knot after reading the article or at least the summary?
A test like this useless? Hardly! Because the engineers first looked where they thought they could gain the most distance in the already known places, then in unknown places. The insights gained from those unknown places and how to properly combine these with the knowns, that is applicable knowledge gained. Engineers should do much more of this, instead of less.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This test was useless. Stick enough batteries in anything and it will travel 1,000 miles. Fill the bed of the truck up to its carrying capacity with batteries. yes, it will go further than 1,000 miles... but not very useful as a truck then is it?
Let me guess... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but it was also traveling 20-25 mph which is not typical.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it was also traveling 20-25 mph which is not typical.
And illegal on the highway, where the minimum speed is 40/45 -- typically ...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it was also traveling 20-25 mph which is not typical.
Perfect for London. Perhaps a bit fast.
Re: (Score:2)
won't fit on those roads
Re: (Score:2)
won't fit on those roads
Make it bendy. Problem solved :)
Finally (Score:2)
The ford lightning has a 100 kWh pack, the cyber truc
Re:Finally (Score:4, Informative)
Electric motors are superior to internal combustion engines in almost all conceivable ways except one, the electric source matching its power.
You mean a problem with the battery? The motor itself is totally fine. The Shinkansen pulls 17.08 MW (22,905 hp) directly from the grid and its motors have no problem converting that amount of power into movement.
Re: (Score:2)
High of 89 in Belle Isle today (Score:2)
So that's fine and all (Score:1)
Well that and as our economic system is gradually collapsed by the high tariffs and disengagement with the global economy people are not going to be able to afford vehicles like this.
But again even if they could what about that coke fueled journey of self-discovery? But you didn't think of that did you!
Re: (Score:2)
But what if I want to drive from New York to Las Vegas all in one go on a Coke fueled journey of self-discovery and action?
If you had enough coke to stay awake for the roughly 42 hours it'd take at 25MPH, you'd run out of juice somewhere around Westfield, Iowa. By that point, you'd probably want to stop anyway, or at least drop dead of a heart attack.
Course, I had to ask ChatGPT the feasibility of this Hollywood inspired road trip, and it seemed to be inclined to think you're gonna need something other than cocaine to pull a double all-nighter. It suggested meth. Man, this new 5.0 model really is something else.
Re: (Score:2)
>But what if I want to drive from New York to Las Vegas all in one
>go on a Coke fueled journey of self-discovery and action?
If you're going straight to the tables from that, we'll happily comp the room for when you crash, along with more drinks and meal! :)
Yeah, less than 25mph! (Score:1)
misleading headline/summary (Score:2)
Just as people can mod a story, can we mod the headline ?
on this case, the headline "Chevy Silverado EV Drives 1,059.2 Miles on a Single Charge, Surpassing World Record" shold get a mod value of 1 or 2, as the headline should read
"heavily modified car manages to go further on one battery charge in non realistic use case" or something like that
new road (Score:3)
A new road is being built from the top of Mt. Everest in a bid to break the new record.