In a bit of a shocker, Stellantis rocked the EV world yesterday by announcing it will put solid-state batteries in its 2026 Dodge Charger Daytona EVs. Oh, they’re only for testing purposes and the batteries — dubbed “Factorial,” after the start-up developing the new electrolyte — are only “quasi-”solid-state. Nonetheless, it’s big news. Current battery technology, which relies on liquid electrolytes, are truly getting long in the tooth, and, if the EV revolution is to continue unabated, solid-state chemistry — which promises both more range and faster charging — is essential.
The big question — besides the obvious “How the Hell did Stellantis, seemingly the most reluctant of EV transitioners, get ahead of Tesla and Toyota with this?” — is why the Dodge Charger? Oh, it’s true that the impending Daytona launch will be a real headline-snatcher, and that being a performance-oriented muscle car, it could use all the energy density it can get.
But current battery technology has no trouble producing Hellcat-like performance, and the Charger’s reach beyond the die-hard muscle-car crowd is minimal. Which leads me to my bigger question: why isn’t the company testing these (hopefully) revolutionary batteries in pickup trucks, which not only need range and charging upgrades, but would be the ultimate showcase for Stellantis’ surprising announcement?
Pickups desperately need better batteries
Unlike how it’s unfolded in pretty much the rest of the world, the electric-vehicle revolution we North Americans have been promised depends largely on the truck segment. Not only are pickups — and their cousins in gas-guzzling, the full-sized body-on-frame SUV — the most egregious emitters of carbon dioxide, they are also the most popular vehicles both north and south of the 49th parallel. Worse yet, if Fortune Business Insights is to be believed, they are to further increase in net sales by some 40% by 2032. In other words, all roads to reduced greenhouse-gas emissions in North America run straight through weaning the light-duty truck market from fossil fuels.
Except it’s not going so very well, is it? Electric-truck sales are not exactly taking the world by storm, are they? Even with the overall U.S. EV market up some 8% so far this year, battery-powered pickups have failed to shine.
Oh, Ford has sold a few F-150 Lightnings. But at what cost? The company expects to lose some US$5.5 billion this year so that its electrified pickup could account for barely three per cent of total F-150 sales. The electric version of GMC’s Hummer is so rare even the most rabid of environmentalists can’t be bothered to protest its existence. And, as for Tesla’s Cybertruck, that stainless-steel Tonka toy that was supposed to be the segment’s revolution—well, except for rich suburbanites looking for a bit of blue-collar cosplay, it’s the joke that TikTok never tires of.
The real problem: range anxiety is real
As easy as it might be for EV proponents to blame EV trucks’ unpopularity on price, the reality is that, while they are excellent vehicles — Ford’s Lightning is, for instance, the best drive of any of its F-150s — they aren’t very good at their job.
The problem is range. And, as much as many in the mobility space denigrate range anxiety as myth or a figment of climate deniers’ imaginations, it is very real. No more so than with large trucks. In our recent Range Finder testing, for instance, Ford’s F-150 Lightning managed only 328 kilometres at 125 kilometres an hour. That’s with Ford’s largest 150-kilowatt-hour battery (the 131 kWh that Ford officially specifies is the battery’s “usable” capacity; there’s really 150 kWh of lithium-ion between its frame rails).
Things get worse if you’re towing a trailer. Much worse. Numerous tests have been conducted using battery-powered pickups to tow trailers. None of them have proven battery-powered trucks very capable. In a Consumer Reports test, a Rivian R1T managed but 136 kilometres pulling a 10,000-pound enclosed double-axle aluminum trailer. An F-150 Lightning Extended Range squeaked out 10 klicks more. Car and Driver, in a similar test, managed but 160 km out of the Ford, and 175 klicks out of the Rivian, while the Hummer EV, powered by its colossus of a battery (246 kWh total, 212.7 kWh usable) managed 220 kilometres.
Closer to home, Stephen and Howard Elmer, Canada’s own “Truck Kings” — no, really, TruckKing.ca redirects straight to their website — pitted the Lightning against another travel trailer and ran out of electrons at 214 klicks.
Two things stand out. Speed and weight are extremely important factors. CR tested a 10,000-pound (aerodynamically blunt) box trailer at 65 miles per hour. The Car and Driver test towed a 6,100-pound travel trailer at 70 mph. And the Truck King boys were hauling another travel trailer of indeterminate weight, but averaged driving between 80 km/h and 100 km/h (hence their higher range numbers).
The second and most important factor is that in no way are those numbers adequate. Considering that few EV drivers ever drop below 10% State of Charge (SoC) before seeking more electrons, and that batteries are typically extremely slow to charge above 80%, you’re basically looking at towing for one hour and 15 minutes and then having to stop for a 60-minute charge (not to mention detaching the trailer).
That is, in the mildest sense of the world, unacceptable. By way of comparison, even the lowliest of gas-powered pickups are good for 300 klicks, and a particularly frugal driver might squeeze 500 kilometres out of a diesel-powered Ford while requiring less than five minutes to fill up, no trailer removal required. The big question, then is—
Will solid-state batteries make towing more viable?
Yes and no. More specifically, yes, these new, more efficient batteries will be an improvement. As to whether they’ll be viable — as in competitive with their fossil-fuelled siblings — well, that’s a much tougher question.
Let’s do a little math. We’ll use Ford’s Lightning as the example — mainly because its 150-kWh battery makes for an easy match — and 175 kilometres as an appropriate measure of range on the highway while towing.
To make the electric F-150 useful, it would need roughly twice the range it currently offers. That would place it just ahead of the least viable ICE technology — turbocharged V6s. To do so will require a 300-kWh battery. Yes, there will be advancements in electric motor and drivetrain efficiencies, but facing off against a truck’s bluff aerodynamics and pulling a 10,000-pound trailer, such improvements are insignificant. In other words, the battery will carry the load.
It’s probably safe to say that 300 kWh of today’s battery technology would be too big to fit even the behemoths that pickups have become. Besides, the 246-kWh battery in the Hummer weighs more than a Honda Civic; a 300-kWh version might be heavier than a Ford Maverick. While it might be physically possible, it is, as I said, probably untenable.
Will solid-state batteries solve the problem?
Again, yes and no. Stellantis’ semi-solid-state batteries can, according to according to Car and Driver, put out 391 watt-hours per kilogram. That’s about 40% better than current nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) batteries. But that’s for the cell all by its lonesome. Factor in battery management, cooling, and safety systems, and there’s probably a 30% advantage, which means, if you’re still working your thumbs on the calculator, it would still weigh 50% more than the current Extended Range’s battery.
You’re looking at towing for one hour and 15 minutes and then having to stop for a 60-minute charge—that is, in the mildest sense of the world, unacceptable
The best of full solid-states are reckoned to eventually be about twice as energy-dense as current liquid-electrolyte formulations. In other words, the best battery we’re envisioning for the future might weigh about the same as the Lightning’s current 400-volt affair.
Solid-state battery cost and charging
Charging a 300-kwh F-150 at the Lightning’s current fast-charging rates — about 150 kilowatts peak; roughly 110 kW between 10% and 80% SoC — getting back on the road would take, well, forever. Not practical at all. Even at today’s top charging speeds — around 300 kW average at best — an 80% charge would still take about 50 minutes. That’s a better proposition, but probably not enough to get coal-rollers to trade in their Powerstrokes.
Even if 400-kW averages become commonplace in a solid-state future, charging will still take more than half an hour. And that’s with chargers that don’t yet exist in Canada, 350-kilowatt units being as rare as hen’s teeth and the 500-kW affairs that would permit that half-hour charge not even a glimmer in Electrify Canada’s eyes yet.
As for cost, solid-sate batteries should eventually, if mass-produced, prove cheaper than current formulations. Initial applications, however, will almost assuredly be more expensive than current formulations, and are likely to remain so well past 2030. For a towing-friendly solid-state formulation to match the price-point of the current Lightning — base MSRP: $79,995 — these future high-tech batteries would have to be 50% cheaper than current pricing (twice the battery at half the cost) which is unlikely before 2032. If you want a towing-friendly truck to be cheaper than today’s offerings, you’ll have to wait even longer.
Production problems plaguing battery manufacture
Besides seeing diminishing growth in sales, the EV industry has been rocked by rollbacks in plans for new battery production facilities. By some reckonings, almost half of the start-ups that have applied for subsidies from the American government have since dropped plans to mass-produce batteries. In some cases, it was the impossibility of competing with the Chinese behemoths. In others, like that of Northvolt, it was a case of not being able to scale up production of what had been promising cell technology.
Indeed, if there’s a lesson to be learned from solid-state batteries, it is that just because headlines scream about the promise of yet another new battery chemistry, it doesn’t mean that said battery chemistry is right around the corner. Solid-state batteries were first promoted for vehicle use at least as far back as 2010 — by both Nissan and Toyota, amongst others — and have yet to be installed in a production vehicle.
The bottom line on EV pickups and towing
Solid-state chemistries will indeed increase the energy density and charging ability of electric vehicles. That will either mean lighter cars with similar ranges and shorter charging times; or, as is probable for pickups and large SUVs, longer ranges with similar charging times. Will these new batteries increase the allure of electric passenger cars? Without a doubt. Will they be enough to make battery-powered trucks a viable alternative for towing? That’s less certain, and probably a question better asked of the people who really do tow their campers, boats, and horses cross-country.
Two things, however, are certain. The first is that, while it may be unknowable if battery technology can ever replace ICEs for truck owners who tow trailers, it’s an absolute certainty that whatever technology might succeed in that challenge won’t arrive in time for Canada to meet its 2035 ZEV mandate.
The second is pure irony: The trucks that are most battery-friendly — those used as little more than urban commuters — are the very same ones that environmentalists decry as most objectionable, while those whose emissions need the most reduction, the gas-guzzling behemoths that pull trailers, will be the most impossible to electrify. And that’s a conundrum I don’t think we’ll solve before 2035.
Sign up for our newsletter Blind-Spot Monitor and follow our social channels on X, Tiktok and LinkedIn to stay up to date on the latest automotive news, reviews, car culture, and vehicle shopping advice.