OT: Did Lightning Strike You? (Talking Cars Tuesday (on Thursday) )
Once again, Ford came out with a classic name, on a beloved old model, and made some purists unhappy. Just like with the "Mustang Mach-E" however, a case can be made that this is a very fast F-150. Yep, we're talking electric pickups.
https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/2022/
So, what'd you think? Ford said that they got 40,000 reservations in their first 48 hours (as I like to remind Tesla fans, reservations =/= sales) while the US market only had about 200,000 electric vehicles sold last year. The idea of a Frunk makes a ton of sense, as now the bed doesn't need a toolbox.
Towing will probably be an issue with range, but for a city work truck this seems like a home run. Anyway, what's your impression? should they have kept the Lightning name for a street racer version? Did you make a reservation?
I'm not a truck guy, so I didn't place a reservation, but Ford is going to sell a ton of these to fleets.
As a Chicago resident, I'd expect that municipal governments like mine should have tons of these on order. Just about every CDOT or park district truck could be replaced with this easily.
If the charging stations are set up, yes.
Charging stations run about $2000 for an excellent one. A city could order twenty of them from Clipper Creek, have them installed within two months, and spend about $50,000 (I added $10,000 for labor).
Let's assume some numbers for the ICE model truck: 80 miles per day, 20 mpg, gas price of $3.50/gallon.
Let's assume some numbers for the electric motor model: 80 miles per day, 15KWh usage per day, electricity price of $0.20 per KWh.
ICE truck: $14/day
Electric truck: $3/day
Assuming 250 working days per year (no weekends + 11 holidays), that's $2750 savings per truck per year.
$2750/truck per year x 20 trucks = $55,000 savings per year.
The charging stations would pay for themselves in 11 months, and even earlier if the truck is used more heavily (e.g., if you double the mileage, the savings becomes $7000 per truck per year, and $140,000 per year for a fleet of 20).
*Note: I did not include the increased price for the EV, and I did not include the EV tax credits in several states, because if they're anything like purchasing my Chevy Volt was, it's probably a wash.
Joby, you did a nice job with the Q&D analysis. As another Volt owner, I agree with your approach. Your analysis could have also included the benefits of substantially less routine and non-routine maintenance on the municipal truck fleet. Our experience with the Volt has also been far less maintenance. We have 140,000 miles on it and have only had new tires, a new 12 volt battery, and wipers.
We are "frequent flyers" to the mechanics with our ICE cars. The Volt? Not much.
Too bad GM gave up on the electric hybrid approach. If they had a more robust version of the Volt in a big, beautiful package it would have done well. We are looking at a Tesla for the next purchase. However, I don't like the look of the 3. There are some great EVs and a lot more choice. However, I don't like spending a lot on cars, so they idea of an S, a Taycan, or a EQS is hard to get my head around.
Yeah, I was pretty salty about GM giving up on the Volt after nearly a decade of dedication to its rollout and to its improvement. They did a pretty poor job of marketing it, because they never had an easy way to describe the PHEV functionality. I wrote to them, and volunteered, “it’s a Tesla for 50 miles; after that, it’s a Prius.”
Thank you for your additional insights about the hidden savings. I had a similar experience: 140,000 miles, new tires and wipers, oil changes as needed and a factory reset for the stereo. That’s it as far as the maintenance goes.
Clipper Creek also has an option where 1 charger can charge 2 vehicles. That would lower your costs even more.
I have a major problem with them calling this the "lightning", The "lightning" F-150 is a SVT F-150 that was the complete opposite of this.
Wife did a commercial for it a week ago and loves it (tv producer).
I get why they did it. I get why they called a 4-door Focus based electric SUV a Mustang. I don't have to like it, but I get it.
And I don't know if they still use SVT branding anywhere, but if the GMC Hummer is viable as a $100K fast heavy truck, I sure hope Ford comes out with a $100K SVT version that's optimized as a street truck.
SVT was apart of roush racing and that side of the company to my belief doesn't exist anymore, Still wish they would have used a different name so the raptor could go back to lightning.
The Mustang thing was more just name recognition, no? At least "Lightning" also makes sense from an "electric vehicle" perspective. "Mustang" doesn't scream "electric vehicle" to me - just that "this is definitely a Ford."
If they just called it a Mach-E I think no one would have been upset. However, I think a lot more people were talking about it since it's a Mustang Mach-E.
Depends on if you believe all press is good press, but by calling it a Mustang they sure got more press.
Wait - what??? The Mustang Mach-E is not an actual Mustang with a battery? I thought it was genetically part of the Mustang lineup, only an electric version of one! No - I didn't really pay attention to it, just noticed it looked weird.
With that news, I am very disappointed in the naming direction of that car! I'm the person they targeted with the name, and it worked... Bastards!
I don't think there had been a 4 door mustang before
Yep, I think you nailed it. Mach-E could be built by anybody. If I wasn't paying attention, I wouldn't really know if it were a Chrysler, GM, or Disney car (like Wall-E, get it?). Since they added the Mustang, I now associate it with Ford.
Mustang will soon be a brand independent of Ford as Ram is to Dodge. There will be many vehicles in coming years with Mustang on them...like it or not.
They couldn't call it "The Shocker". Apparently, that name has other associations
I think Ford should shoot a commercial of an F-150 monster-trucking over a bunch of Teslas. It would make all the Musk-worshipping techbros retreat to twitter and gnash their teeth.
Elon Musk would purposefully blow up a rocket on top of an F150 Lightning in retaliation
LOL!! I could totally see him landing a Starship test vehicle on one!
I'd grab popcorn for that shit
I'm with you on this. I'm here for the EV cold war.
This product just killed a lot of these small EV start ups..... they just don’t know it yet.
Not a new car guy or a pickup guy, but I'm willing to bet that Ford will sell considerably more of these Lightnings than Tesla will sell of that goofy Cybertruck.
One thing that I didn't remember, Tesla's Cybertruck reveal (with the non-bulletproof window mishap thingy) was all the way back in 2019. Sure, there's been a pandemic, but nothing in almost two years. The F-150 Lightning is due for delivery in early 2022.
Also, Ford makes ~900,000 F-150s per year.
Tesla's Cybertruck is the Pontiac Aztek of pickups.
LOL. you sir hit the nail on the head. ive been trying to draw a parallel for the cybertruck for quite a while.....this is perfect.
In all honesty, I think the ugliness of the cyber truck was on purpose. His cars/suvs are top notch…I have a feeling he will reveal a better looking truck option soon enough.
This seems like a really smart play, assuming the quality is on par with the gas models. I’m also hopeful that this will reduce the prevalence of that Tesla monstrosity in the streets.
I know they are still projections, but they are predicting there will be lower warranty claims for EV as there are fewer moving parts. In addition, Ford will be using OTA (Over the Air) SW updates on these vehicles (Mach E included) so it will, in essence, be similar to you iPhone where you will get a notification of a SW update on your SYNC screen.
In addition, Ford is claiming that when you by a Lighting, you will get the charging station needed at you home included with you vehicle purchase. Finally, they are projecting the MSRP price to be similar to the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles.
I will be placing my reservation shortly....
are there any reservations about OTA connection and nefarious hackers?
There should be... Tesla has been doing OTA updates for several years now, so nobody can claim this is a new thing. But considering the overall state of IoT (Internet of Things), and the history of car makers SW, I would want some details on how they secure it.
Well for one, Tesla is much more of an "IT" company than is a traditional automaker. Tesla has held annual "hacker" events offering prizes if someone is able to exploit vulnerabilities. Nothing is 100% secure but it does seem like they are more active is that area.
No reason Ford cannot do something similar (certainly have the resources if they give it the priority).
Since I work in the SW division at Ford, what I can tell you is that Ford is committing more resources to Cyber Security understanding the concerns with OTA.
i believe the EV f150s are a little cheaper comparatively equipped until ford uses up their federal credits for EVs/plug ins
Does anybody know how many pickup trucks are sold for personal use vs commercial use? I imagine at least 50% have to be sold to construction companies, contractors, and other business users, not people who want a truck just to have one. For commercial use, it makes a lot of sense, particularly since it can replace generators on work sites, and charging infrastructure can be planned for max efficiency.
They can get a lot of fleet sales, especially with small businesses doing local work. But to do so, they have also provide a fairly cheap and easy way to charge them. Expecting an owner to just plug into the wall each night for 8 hours might work for some, but a lot of workers are going to balk at this. No worker would pay his own money to fill up a company-provided gas tank, and they won't want to pay for the electricity, either. A lot of businesses will also want a faster charging method than 8 hours because 'local' travel can still mean more than ~100-150 miles/day if workers are moving from one job to another all day long.
The starting price is great for businesses, but charging options need to be available or it'll be a no-go. Is this a fleet charging station, or individual chargers at worker homes with a separate meter? Can it use the Tesla charge stations?
I'm also not sure why any 'purists' would give a crap. If you don't want an electric truck, don't f'in buy it.
The biggest customers will likely be businesses and municipalities with large and diverse fleets. The kind that have their own marshalling yards and staff mechanics. They can add a wall of chargers fast chargers to handle quick top-offs and put everything else on standard(ish) plugs over night. And when they need something with more range, service time, or towing capacity, a few legacy vehicles can cover those gaps.
Agree with large fleets... I was thinking more about a good sized small business - along the lines of an HVAC company that has 20-30 vans. Still a 'small buiness', but can it afford to install a wall of fast chargers? Maybe? I dunno what that would cost. Seems like it would be worth the upfront cost over the life of maintenance on a gas truck, though. But a lot of the techs driving those take them home each night.
I originally thought that midsize trade companies would leap at these, but your concerns give me reason to think they might hesitate. I know companies near me send often vehicles home with their employees. Dividing up payment for gasoline is easy if you have a company gas card. It would be a lot harder to manage if employees have to charge their company vehicles at home.
You can be reimbursed pretty kwh charged at home or just let mile driven. Lots of ways to make this easy on workers.
This is why the purists could be upset at the name. Previous F150 Lightnings were "sport trucks". Designed to be fast and fun on the road. This latest truck is a 4-door "normal" truck, that happens to be powered by electricity. Thanks to electric motors, it's pretty quick, but it's not the special edition that previously named Lightnings were.
Yeah, I should have clarified myself - I get the issues with the name itself. I was thinking more about the people that cry about electric vehicles to begin with - the people who say 'no truck should be electric, hurrdurr'. And those people exist. They are the same fools who modify their trucks to blow excessive amounts of black soot and call it 'Prius repellent'. The same people who scream 'drill baby, drill!'.
I'm not worried about the six people bothered by this.
EV lightning has a 0-60 of 4.4 sec vs the SVT lightning's 5.4 sec.
With a 400 mile range, charging everyday would not be needed. In addition, IF they wanted to "top off" the battery each night, it is not 8 hours (that is for a full recharge, quick charges can take upto only 20 minutes)
Aren't they claiming up to 300 mile range with the extended battery? That should be plenty, although that also assumes ideal conditions (probably) and would not include things like using the batteries as a generator or power source for tools, equipment, etc.
I think what really will set this truck apart is not only its charge range but the fact that you can plug into any 120 or 240v outlet to charge. Plus with the home charger, if your home power goes out you can use the truck as a generator for 3 days or up to 10 with rationing. That's a pretty good selling point. If I were in the market for a new truck it would be at or near top of my list.
No. Just ... no. Range of 230 miles. Can get "extended" range option of 300 miles. And as we all know that's optimal situations on a track somewhere. Real life is typically less than that.
Until electric vehicles get the range of gas/diesel and can recharge (fill up) in 5 min like gas/diesel, I won't touch them. Just doesn't make sense for me and my family.
I get the desire to "minimize carbon footprint" but I just laugh at that. It mostly just makes people feel good about themselves while not achieving anything. The mines used to get the rare earth metals that go into these batteries absolutely wreck the environment (and use fossil fuel machines to do the mining) and the electricity used to power these vehicles is still mostly obtained through burning coal/fossil fuels.
I support the idea of electric vehicles but I just think that we're still a ways away from it being useful in terms of equivalence to gas/diesel and better for the environment. Until we get there it doesn't make sense to me.
Detroit to Petoskey (270 miles), towing a boat, with one ~30 minute charge stop. That's what I need to be a customer for an electric pick-up. That alleviates any range anxiety for me.
Which means the charging infrastructure needs to be there on I-75, readily available enough during a holiday weekend traffic.