How Outdated Engineering Models Distort Today’s EV & Road Charges Debate

[Biker16]

https://cleantechnica.com/2025/12/06/how-outdated-engineering-models-distort-todays-ev-road-charges-debate/

 

 

 

Quote

The debate about vehicle weight and road damage shows how quickly a simple idea can gain traction even when the underlying evidence is thin. Commenters often reach for a familiar claim that heavier vehicles must be responsible for increased road wear. The argument sounds reasonable at first glance and it appeals to a basic intuition that more weight should equal more damage.

 

The trouble is that intuition is a poor guide to pavement engineering. Most modern roads are designed for axle loads far above anything in the light duty fleet. Only the heaviest commercial vehicles push pavements toward their design limits. Cars, crossovers, SUVs, and pickup trucks sit so far below those limits that their differences in mass do not register in most models of pavement fatigue or rutting. The idea that EVs or even the most outsized of US SUVs create meaningful additional road damage because they weigh more does not stand up well when set beside contemporary engineering research.

 

[Sherminator98]

14 hours ago, Biker16 said:

The idea that EVs or even the most outsized of US SUVs create meaningful additional road damage because they weigh more does not stand up well when set beside contemporary engineering research.

 

It boils down to confirmation bias-it's just like EV fires-they get a lot press because they are something new/different, but yet have lower rates then ICE powered vehicles

[morgan20]

On 12/7/2025 at 5:12 PM, Biker16 said:

Most modern roads are designed for axle loads far above anything in the light duty fleet. Only the heaviest commercial vehicles push pavements toward their design limits. Cars, crossovers, SUVs, and pickup trucks sit so far below those limits that their differences in mass do not register in most models of pavement fatigue or rutting. The idea that EVs or even the most outsized of US SUVs create meaningful additional road damage because they weigh more does not stand up well when set beside contemporary engineering research.

 

Yea, exactly. One of my neighbors works at INDOT and confirmed the info above. Indiana's busiest highways for heavy duty truck traffic have higher design limits for this very reason.

 

Speaking of INDOT and EV, earlier this year US 52/231 near West Lafayette, IN became the first highway in the U.S. to wirelessly charge a battery electric Class 7/8 truck in motion:

 

For the first time in the U.S., a roadway has wirelessly charged an electric heavy-duty truck driving at highway speeds, demonstrating key technology that could help lower the costs of building electrified highways for all electric vehicles to use.

 

 “INDOT is proud to partner with Purdue on this project,” said INDOT Commissioner Lyndsay Quist. “While there is still more to explore, we are seeing what the future could hold for heavy-duty EV charging and transportation.”

 

The Purdue system demonstrates “dynamic wireless power transfer,” with “dynamic” referring to vehicles in motion. A few other states and countries have also begun testing roads designed to enable dynamic wireless power transfer. But making this possible for highways — and particularly for semis and other heavy-duty vehicles — is a unique challenge. Because vehicles travel so much faster on highways than city roads, they need to be charged at higher power levels.

 

The Purdue-designed wireless charging system works at power levels much higher than what has been demonstrated in the U.S. so far. Using the test segment in West Lafayette, this system delivered 190 kilowatts to a truck traveling at 65 miles per hour.

 

[Motorpsychology]

Being very much naive in this subject, the article implies that there is a net charge to the truck's power battery over its drain from supplying energy to its drive motor. Is that similar to how an inductive phone charger supplies a much smaller rate of charge while the phone is performing an operation(s), e.g. on a call, navigation app, both. the Wireless charger in my car is zero sum for all practical purposes. the Rate of charge is nearly equal to the discharge while running Apple Maps and/or Music with a call, and the phone gets very warm. Maybe that will be a side benefit in the future; inductive vehicle charging may keep the roadway clear of ice and snow!

Ignorance Is Bliss File: I kind of have a gut feeling that there might be "electron drag" between the truck and the roadway as the truck moves down the road.

[Sherminator98]

55 minutes ago, Motorpsychology said:

Being very much naive in this subject, the article implies that there is a net charge to the truck's power battery over its drain from supplying energy to its drive motor. Is that similar to how an inductive phone charger supplies a much smaller rate of charge while the phone is performing an operation(s), e.g. on a call, navigation app, both. the Wireless charger in my car is zero sum for all practical purposes. the Rate of charge is nearly equal to the discharge while running Apple Maps and/or Music with a call, and the phone gets very warm. Maybe that will be a side benefit in the future; inductive vehicle charging may keep the roadway clear of ice and snow!

Ignorance Is Bliss File: I kind of have a gut feeling that there might be "electron drag" between the truck and the roadway as the truck moves down the road.

 

Nah what your experiencing with your wireless charger is just poor contact between the charger and phone causing that heat to be generated. Also Ford's wireless chargers completely suck from what I've seen. 

 

I use an iphone with a Magsafe charger on a custom mount on my Bronco, hooked up to the USB C port-I can run Nav and Apple Music at the same time and still charge the phone, because the Magsafe charger is lined up perfectly with induction coils on the phone. 

[rmc523]

2 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Nah what your experiencing with your wireless charger is just poor contact between the charger and phone causing that heat to be generated. Also Ford's wireless chargers completely suck from what I've seen. 

 

I use an iphone with a Magsafe charger on a custom mount on my Bronco, hooked up to the USB C port-I can run Nav and Apple Music at the same time and still charge the phone, because the Magsafe charger is lined up perfectly with induction coils on the phone. 

 

It's not just Ford - Audi's wireless chargers get super hot too, and they don't charge very fast - I find them pointless, especially considering they also take up storage bin space.

[akirby]

7 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

It's not just Ford - Audi's wireless chargers get super hot too, and they don't charge very fast - I find them pointless, especially considering they also take up storage bin space.

Phones can get hot anyway when using certain apps.

[rmc523]

6 minutes ago, akirby said:

Phones can get hot anyway when using certain apps.

 

I made the mistake of updating my phone a couple days ago, and it's gotten hot/worse battery life  

[Sherminator98]

Just now, rmc523 said:

 

I made the mistake of updating my phone a couple days ago, and it's gotten hot/worse battery life  

 

Did you update to iOS26? I had the same issue, but after a couple days it was fine again. Its just the background processes that are happening from the upgrade. 

[rmc523]

7 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Did you update to iOS26? I had the same issue, but after a couple days it was fine again. Its just the background processes that are happening from the upgrade. 

 

Yes, I did.  I was on 18-something before.  Good to know.

[Sherminator98]

4 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Yes, I did.  I was on 18-something before.  Good to know.

 

Yeah they changed their numbering of OS updates to match the year instead of version number...

[Motorpsychology]

7 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Nah what your experiencing with your wireless charger is just poor contact between the charger and phone causing that heat to be generated. Also Ford's wireless chargers completely suck from what I've seen. 

 

I use an iphone with a Magsafe charger on a custom mount on my Bronco, hooked up to the USB C port-I can run Nav and Apple Music at the same time and still charge the phone, because the Magsafe charger is lined up perfectly with induction coils on the phone. 

My Ranger has Sync 3 which requires corded connection, and no wireless charger. Our Mazda CX-90 has Sync 4 and a wireless charger, but my wife's Jurassic-era i-Phone SE won't charge at all, as it is not compatible. There is probably something to what you said about poor contact; my iPhone 12 Mini has an Otterbox Defender case, so the little electrons have a tough journey.  We solved the problem with an old school 12v charger plugged in to the console. and turned off the charge pad in Settings. The phones charge just fine and they don't need to be plugged into the system for Apple Car Play.

[akirby]

I almost never have to charge my phone in the car.  Then again I don't use CarPlay or use it for navigation.

[rmc523]

15 hours ago, Motorpsychology said:

My Ranger has Sync 3 which requires corded connection, and no wireless charger. Our Mazda CX-90 has Sync 4 and a wireless charger, but my wife's Jurassic-era i-Phone SE won't charge at all, as it is not compatible. There is probably something to what you said about poor contact; my iPhone 12 Mini has an Otterbox Defender case, so the little electrons have a tough journey.  We solved the problem with an old school 12v charger plugged in to the console. and turned off the charge pad in Settings. The phones charge just fine and they don't need to be plugged into the system for Apple Car Play.

 

Impressive that your CX-90 has SYNC 4!

 

13 hours ago, akirby said:

I almost never have to charge my phone in the car.  Then again I don't use CarPlay or use it for navigation.

 

I just use the usb-c slot/cord.  I don't bother trying the wireless charger because it's useless (I keep stuff in the cubby anyway).