2022 Ford Lightning Discussion

[lamrith]

Ugh, it looks like its only going to have a 5.5ft bed.  That's disappointing.

Keeps the weight down I'm sure.  It makes sense the first one here will be marketed to the 90% of the people that drive them to work and back and never put anything in them outside of a set of golf clubs.  I'm sure the crew cab 5.5' is the most popular version of f-150 they sell, it was very difficult to find a used one with a 6.5' when I bought mine.

Towing will obviously crush the range, but they will be zippy fast.

Seems very few non ford staff have been able to drive them so far.  Those that have ridden in them say it is instant zoom, and more responsive than most other EV's they have been in.  Mid 4 second 0-60.

I drove a Mach E the other day. I’ll literally never buy one ever, but the acceleration was sort of shocking. That thing scoots.

  That is what I have heard. If I lost my SHO today the Mach-E would be on a pretty short list of replacements... If I could find one available to buy.

[kselkhunter]

I'm expecting that like most other companies Ford will eventually release multiple battery options for longer ranges later.

I'm definitely liking the Rivian.  The wife wants their R1S now.  They are looking at a $5B plant in Texas now to ramp up volumes.  The R1T truck and first R1S are out now for those that got in early on pre-orders.  New orders placed now won't be available until January.   Waiting on official EPA ratings on those....claim is 300 miles.  Rivian to launch a larger battery to get up to 400 miles range in 2022.   The ability to raise the ground clearance from 8 inches up to 14.9 inches when in rough terrain is a cool feature.   As is the quad motors: each wheel has a motor for true 4WD.  They are also building out a nationwide charging network, except will use the DC fast charging standard instead of a custom method (ie Tesla).   https://rivian.com/r1s

[lamrith]

I'm expecting that like most other companies Ford will eventually release multiple battery options for longer ranges later.

I'm definitely liking the Rivian.  The wife wants their R1S now.  They are looking at a $5B plant in Texas now to ramp up volumes.  The R1T truck and first R1S are out now for those that got in early on pre-orders.  New orders placed now won't be available until January.   Waiting on official EPA ratings on those....claim is 300 miles.  Rivian to launch a larger battery to get up to 400 miles range in 2022.   The ability to raise the ground clearance from 8 inches up to 14.9 inches when in rough terrain is a cool feature.   As is the quad motors: each wheel has a motor for true 4WD.  They are also building out a nationwide charging network, except will use the DC fast charging standard instead of a custom method (ie Tesla).   https://rivian.com/r1s

I would hope so to on the even larger batteries.  Tech on those is continually advancing.  It would be cool if down the road higher capacity was developed to fit in same space and Ford could offer upgrades down the road.

Those have decent specs and some cool features.  Looks smaller than the lightning, more like a ranger (which is fine), a bit futuristic looking for my taste.  My biggest concern is it sounds like they are out there making their own network and the fact they are a brand new unknown company.  It would have been really smart if they have partnered with existing charging networks, but at least they seem to be using hte common charging port so one could get an account with EA or other charging stations.

[Stein]

Uncle Sam really needs to jump in and mandate some required charging type for both the car and charging station before it gets too out of hand.  They can have proprietary stuff on top, but the market really needs to be able to easily charge any vehicle at any charger.  Imagine what a headache it would be if all gas cars had different shaped nozzles at the fuel pump.

Given that it's a truck, a cool feature would be the ability to buy an external battery pack you could throw in the bed for long trips.  With new battery tech, it wouldn't be that heavy.

[kselkhunter]

There is a charging standard, and a standard plug spec J1772 (for Level 1 & Level 2) and CCS (used to be CHAdeMO) for DC & AC charging.  Tesla is the only one that did a unique one, and they provide an adapter to fit the standard so it's all good.  No need for government to intervene.  Although the new Model 3s also have CCS ports on some models.  Most new cars from most all brands will have CCS ports on them so you can use any J1772 or DC fast charging station.


Tesla big benefit is their new Gen3 super chargers are ridiculously fast.  Faster than even the new DC Fast charging standard launching next year.   But Tesla's adapter plug makes a Tesla compatible to the standard plugs.  And now that Tesla just opened their charging network to all other brands (for a fee) there is an adapter plug to connect the supercharger to the standard J1772 plug.  Non-Tesla's just won't be able to charge at the faster charging rate.


I forget which brand it is, but one of the new EVs has solar panels on it to extend the battery range when driven during the day.   


I think the weight of the "spare" battery lifting in and out of the bed could be a challenge as those things are not light.  But I imagine now that so many brands have EVs coming out that we'll see some cool technology getting added on.  Perhaps something along the lines of what you're suggesting that are maybe stackable smaller capacity batteries that you can add and subtract if going on a longer road trip.  But with so many super chargers and other charging stations already out there you can basically drive anywhere in the country on a freeway in a Tesla today without getting range anxiety.  It's the remote hunting trips where I think the spare batteries could come in most useful, when you're not near a major highway to top up at a charging station.  It should be an interesting next 5 years as the new technologies start to roll out.

[Stein]

When I looked into visiting my brother in MT, it would take 4 stops for a total of 2 hours charge time (model 3).  To me that's a no-go, I'll do two stops which is double what I do now, but 4 is too many.  It only saves $17 over paying for gas.

For in town or work commutes, yeah, they are great.  For road trips, I'll take my 34 gallon gas machine for now.

If you think the current fast chargers are big, wait until you see what's coming down the pike for commercial stuff -    I have a buddy working on a pilot project and the power required to run the charger is mind boggling.

[kselkhunter]

With the Tesla V3 superchargers installed now, the charge time is significantly lower than it used to be.   It's 250kW per car now (no more power sharing), and 1000 miles per hour charging rate.   Number of stops to recharge depends on which model and battery size that you choose. 


The new DC fast charging stations for non-Tesla's will almost keep pace.  There is theoretically some 350kW stations coming from Electrify America that will put all the other brands into the same stratosphere as Tesla.  But for now the 150kW DC fast chargers are still better than the Level 2 Chargepoint and Blink stations.  Not that those Level 2 stations are bad, I used them for years back when I leased my Ford Focus electric for my city commuter.   The Level 2 charger that I'm installing in my garage will charge up to 32 miles per hour, which is fine for overnight charging.


For the Ford Lightning, I can't tell if it has a CCS connector or just the old J1772.  The website just references the at home charging station or a Mobile cable for using 120V and 240V charging stations....meaning it may not support DC fast charging, which would mean it may not have a CCS port.  But I don't want to assume, so am trying to find out from Ford.  As it would be very stupid for Ford not to use a CCS port (ie you can still use a J1772 plug off a Level 2 charger in a CCS port....so there is no reason to use a J1772 over a CCS)....so am giving Ford the benefit of the doubt until I see the actual specs on the Lightning charging.    Edited:  Confirmed Ford  did indeed use the CCS port for their charging port.  So it can use the DC Fast charging stations as well as the Level 2s.


Yeah the new chargers targeting electric semi trucks are some high power requirements.   I'm not on the battery side of things anymore, mostly focused on the autonomous compute side of things. 

[lamrith]

When I looked into visiting my brother in MT, it would take 4 stops for a total of 2 hours charge time (model 3).  To me that's a no-go, I'll do two stops which is double what I do now, but 4 is too many.  It only saves $17 over paying for gas.

You are not wrong about the time spent charging, it really is an issue and imho EV's are not really roadtrip rigs at their current stage of development, but they are getting there quick. 

That sounds a bit off for savings honestly.  Unless you were driving some econobox and using cheapest fuel you could and paying electrify america charge rates.
Model 3's avg 4.4Mi/Kwh and Tesla only charges $.25/Kwh  So $.056/mi.  A run to Billings for example would only cost $48 one way.  I cannot thing of many ICE that would be close to that?  25mpg @ $3.65/gal would be over $120..

[Stein]

When I looked into visiting my brother in MT, it would take 4 stops for a total of 2 hours charge time (model 3).  To me that's a no-go, I'll do two stops which is double what I do now, but 4 is too many.  It only saves $17 over paying for gas.

You are not wrong about the time spent charging, it really is an issue and imho EV's are not really roadtrip rigs at their current stage of development, but they are getting there quick. 

That sounds a bit off for savings honestly.  Unless you were driving some econobox and using cheapest fuel you could and paying electrify america charge rates.
Model 3's avg 4.4Mi/Kwh and Tesla only charges $.25/Kwh  So $.056/mi.  A run to Billings for example would only cost $48 one way.  I cannot thing of many ICE that would be close to that?  25mpg @ $3.65/gal would be over $120..

That's from Tesla's mapping website where you plug in your vehicle and the origin and destination and it tells you where to stop, for how long and what the savings over gas would be.

[jackelope]

When I looked into visiting my brother in MT, it would take 4 stops for a total of 2 hours charge time (model 3).  To me that's a no-go, I'll do two stops which is double what I do now, but 4 is too many.  It only saves $17 over paying for gas.

You are not wrong about the time spent charging, it really is an issue and imho EV's are not really roadtrip rigs at their current stage of development, but they are getting there quick. 

That sounds a bit off for savings honestly.  Unless you were driving some econobox and using cheapest fuel you could and paying electrify america charge rates.
Model 3's avg 4.4Mi/Kwh and Tesla only charges $.25/Kwh  So $.056/mi.  A run to Billings for example would only cost $48 one way.  I cannot thing of many ICE that would be close to that?  25mpg @ $3.65/gal would be over $120..

That's from Tesla's mapping website where you plug in your vehicle and the origin and destination and it tells you where to stop, for how long and what the savings over gas would be.

Their numbers don’t make sense.

[lamrith]

When I looked into visiting my brother in MT, it would take 4 stops for a total of 2 hours charge time (model 3).  To me that's a no-go, I'll do two stops which is double what I do now, but 4 is too many.  It only saves $17 over paying for gas.

You are not wrong about the time spent charging, it really is an issue and imho EV's are not really roadtrip rigs at their current stage of development, but they are getting there quick. 

That sounds a bit off for savings honestly.  Unless you were driving some econobox and using cheapest fuel you could and paying electrify america charge rates.
Model 3's avg 4.4Mi/Kwh and Tesla only charges $.25/Kwh  So $.056/mi.  A run to Billings for example would only cost $48 one way.  I cannot thing of many ICE that would be close to that?  25mpg @ $3.65/gal would be over $120..

That's from Tesla's mapping website where you plug in your vehicle and the origin and destination and it tells you where to stop, for how long and what the savings over gas would be.

Odd that def does not add up, they must have put in some extremely high ICE MPG and low fuel prices?  Without being address specific how far into MT were they going?  Just to Missoula/Kalispel or all the way to Billings? 

This link is a great way to compare $/mi of ICE vs EV.  Just set the annual mileage to your trip miles..
http://chooseev.com/savings-calculator/

EV still pays penalty in terms of time for charging but from a pure "cost of fueling" standpoint Tesla is better, specially since (so far) tesla only charges $.25/Kwh.  Other charging Co are charging $.32-42/Kwh so there is not as much savings on road trips.  For many here that are hunters and trying to get away from people and deeps into the woods, or long trips to remote hunting areas, it is not a great match yet.

All that said the real sweet spot for EV's given current tech is day to day driving, not road trips.  Unless you are burning 200mi+ a day the chances are very high that an EV will save you money on fuel and maintenance costs over a traditional ICE.  Charge them with 240V outlet and you will see the vehicle charge from 10-15% to 80% or more overnight if needed.  Getting a 240V outlet does not always require an electrician either.  EV is such a hot thing that there are piggyback/sharing modules any homeowner can plug into a dryer outlet to split and share it without hiring an electrician.

[CP]

For me, the only EV that makes sense is one that I don’t have to charge away from my home and I don’t need to add electrical capabilities to my house to charge it.  Something that can run a few errands around town without tripping range anxiety, is capable of highway speeds, charges in a few hours on a standard 110 outlet, or at worst 220.  That means a smaller, lightweight vehicle with a relatively small battery with a reasonable price.  That would take care of 90% of my vehicle needs.  Doesn’t make sense to haul 1000+ lbs of battery around to pickup a few groceries or drive to and from work.   

For the other 10%, I’ll stick with the carbon-based units.

[Stein]

Tesla charges about 240% for electricity than I can get from my house full retail prices.  Someone has to pay for all those charging stations.

I agree with CP, until a generational advance, we're looking at having our next car an EV that my wife uses to commute a few miles and trips around town.  Towing the boat, road trips, hauling more people and whatever else will be a gas truck.  Seems to me to be the best option.

I can put a 240V circuit in the house pretty easily and that will get us enough range fast enough to not worry about charging stations.

[jackelope]

I’m really digging the idea of hybrids. The powerboost F150 is impressive also. The power is ridiculous. Fuel economy is good, especially bouncing around town, driving 10 miles to work,  groceries etc.
While I’m I’m not sold on full EV for my own use, they have a place. City municipality vehicles for example. Those vehicles don’t get any miles put on them at any one time. Running around town, then parking them back at the shop or office or whatever to charge overnight, get back in them and go the next day.
These vehicles won’t work for everyone and the manufacturers know that.

[jackelope]

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2020/12/11/2021-ford-f-150-powerboost-fuel-economy.html