(Frenchy isn't looking, right?)
It's looking like the Lighting is already hitting a saturation point. It does seem like a tough market (trucks) for electric vehicles.
Ford Reportedly Plans to Halve F-150 Lightning Production
Based on an internal planning memo, Ford will dial back the electric pickup truck's production due to "changing market demand."
The growth rate for electric-vehicle adoption has recently been in something of a lull, and automakers have responded with a widespread pullback in EV investment. Ford is no different, with the automaker planning to scale back production of the F-150 Lightning next year......
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a46107373/ford-f-150-lightning-production-reduced-report/
This is an interesting projection of total market saturation points, which appears to max out at about 30%:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/20/cars/electric-cars-sales-gas-cars-dg/index.html
The undertone: government isn't helping enough.
Figured that was gonna happen at some point.
~ sad trombone ~
They swung pretty hard the other way last year, this is just readjusting.
My wife's construction company trialed a couple of Lightnings this summer. I haven't received a full report back yet, but they were doing a full TCO analysis for the fleet. One truck was a parts runner for sites spread over a few counties, the other was a sample runner for the same. The commercial market is what really counts for these trucks.
That "projection" graph is funny. It's all projection, no data.
No Time
UltraDork
12/14/23 8:42 p.m.
I wonder if the hype around the Ramcharger is contributing to lower demand?
If I was in the market for an electric truck to do truck stuff, I'd pass on the Lightning and wait for the Ramcharger.
The Lightning would be great for the trucks as a large family vehicle, with the occasional truck duties, like towing the boat to the lake, but based on the specs the Ramcharger will be the one to have if you want local electric capability with longer towing range.
Yeah, the problem with Lightnings as commercial trucks is that most of the ones they've built have been optioned out and expensive. That might have been "we have lots of demand and limited production, so we'll maximize profits", but OTOH it might also have been "we're underpricing the base vehicle and then making it up by only selling it with a bunch of options with lots of markup".
I know one way they could sell a lot more of them. (Do like Elon and) drop a couple ten thousands off the sticker price.
As Toyman has pointed out, if they'd build them as working trucks, they might be able to sell a bunch of them to companies that need new work trucks. We have friends who own one of the largest electrician companies in town. They CONSTANTLY have trucks down for maintenance. If they could start replacing ICE trucks with EV trucks economically, it would be a no-brainer (especially since they are in the electricity business!).
Yeah, they raised prices a ton, and drastically limited production of base model trucks to push buyers towards higher trims. I see this as a return to equilibrium.
Almost daily, people ask me if I like my truck, and if I've had any problems with it. A lot of times they tell me they had a reservation at some point, too.
I always answer enthusiastically with "It's the best truck I've ever owned, period. I've had zero issues, and I've put 13,000 miles on it in 5 months with two giant road trips too. I love it. I tow my race car with it and it's great for that, too. It has some quirks, so every single person shouldn't go buy one tomorrow, but if your use case fits its strengths it's perfect."
They usually reply with something like "Oh wow. I heard they were terrible and they are all $100,000." Then they leave.
Interestingly, they all (even the diesel truck bros who come up to tell me their EV jokes) know the Lightning can power a house, and they all want to know if it's really true. That feature is the first and only thing most people know about the truck.
It's not my job to change public opinion of EVs, but Ford should probably talk more about the day-to-day experience and less about the spec sheet.
All I can say is that I still feel bad for my fellow ICE engineers that were forced to retire for EV engineers. Some are doing well, but some are forced to sue F because of how they were fired.
Anyway, that's not this thread.
^ It's not but it would be an interesting thing to discuss
SV reX
MegaDork
12/15/23 8:15 a.m.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
The commercial market is not primarily 1/2 ton trucks. It's 3/4 ton trucks.
Looks to me like Ford and Rivian are fighting over the same small market (which may already be saturated)
SV reX
MegaDork
12/15/23 8:22 a.m.
In reply to Tom Suddard :
I ask questions like that every time I see an electric truck too, but I'm not buying. Price point doesn't work.
(and I have no shortage of opportunity, because I've been working for Rivian for several months)
No Time said:
I wonder if the hype around the Ramcharger is contributing to lower demand?
If I was in the market for an electric truck to do truck stuff, I'd pass on the Lightning and wait for the Ramcharger.
The Lightning would be great for the trucks as a large family vehicle, with the occasional truck duties, like towing the boat to the lake, but based on the specs the Ramcharger will be the one to have if you want local electric capability with longer towing range.
My experience with Dodge products tells me a Dodge, sorry "ram" EV would only be slightly better than a Lucas in terms of reliability.
EVs are a compelling choice for a lot of people, and will be more so as the technology and infrastructure improves. But they are too expensive at the moment. Ford foolishly raised prices on the Lightning because they though that the initital demand would stay high. I still think the "hockey stick" growth will happen, it will just take longer than some folks thought.
dyintorace said:
As Toyman has pointed out, if they'd build them as working trucks, they might be able to sell a bunch of them to companies that need new work trucks. We have friends who own one of the largest electrician companies in town. They CONSTANTLY have trucks down for maintenance. If they could start replacing ICE trucks with EV trucks economically, it would be a no-brainer (especially since they are in the electricity business!).
EVs still have ball joints and suspension and steering parts to wear out or fail and they still have brakes and it looks like EVs will need brakes far more frequently than gasoline vehicles because they rarely get used, so they turn into balls of rust and the pads get cheesegratered if they don't simply seize in place.
They still have cooling units that will corrode and leak every few years.
They still need tires and need the HVAC system functional.
Engine is just a small part of what makes operating a truck so expensive.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
dyintorace said:
As Toyman has pointed out, if they'd build them as working trucks, they might be able to sell a bunch of them to companies that need new work trucks. We have friends who own one of the largest electrician companies in town. They CONSTANTLY have trucks down for maintenance. If they could start replacing ICE trucks with EV trucks economically, it would be a no-brainer (especially since they are in the electricity business!).
EVs still have ball joints and suspension and steering parts to wear out or fail and they still have brakes and it looks like EVs will need brakes far more frequently than gasoline vehicles because they rarely get used, so they turn into balls of rust and the pads get cheesegratered if they don't simply seize in place.
They still have cooling units that will corrode and leak every few years.
They still need tires and need the HVAC system functional.
Engine is just a small part of what makes operating a truck so expensive.
Brake issues do not appear to be significant in EVs. My direct experience is that the brakes are less than half worn at 100,000 miles. Rusty slider pins can happen, but I've never greased mine and I live in the land of salt. There are just an order of magnitude less things to go wrong on an EV than a comparable ICE vehicle. Far fewer moving parts will, on average, result in less maintenance.
mattm said:
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
dyintorace said:
As Toyman has pointed out, if they'd build them as working trucks, they might be able to sell a bunch of them to companies that need new work trucks. We have friends who own one of the largest electrician companies in town. They CONSTANTLY have trucks down for maintenance. If they could start replacing ICE trucks with EV trucks economically, it would be a no-brainer (especially since they are in the electricity business!).
EVs still have ball joints and suspension and steering parts to wear out or fail and they still have brakes and it looks like EVs will need brakes far more frequently than gasoline vehicles because they rarely get used, so they turn into balls of rust and the pads get cheesegratered if they don't simply seize in place.
They still have cooling units that will corrode and leak every few years.
They still need tires and need the HVAC system functional.
Engine is just a small part of what makes operating a truck so expensive.
Brake issues do not appear to be significant in EVs. My direct experience is that the brakes are less than half worn at 100,000 miles. Rusty slider pins can happen, but I've never greased mine and I live in the land of salt. There are just an order of magnitude less things to go wrong on an EV than a comparable ICE vehicle. Far fewer moving parts will, on average, result in less maintenance.
Do you live in the rust belt?
Streetwiseguy said:
mattm said:
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
dyintorace said:
As Toyman has pointed out, if they'd build them as working trucks, they might be able to sell a bunch of them to companies that need new work trucks. We have friends who own one of the largest electrician companies in town. They CONSTANTLY have trucks down for maintenance. If they could start replacing ICE trucks with EV trucks economically, it would be a no-brainer (especially since they are in the electricity business!).
EVs still have ball joints and suspension and steering parts to wear out or fail and they still have brakes and it looks like EVs will need brakes far more frequently than gasoline vehicles because they rarely get used, so they turn into balls of rust and the pads get cheesegratered if they don't simply seize in place.
They still have cooling units that will corrode and leak every few years.
They still need tires and need the HVAC system functional.
Engine is just a small part of what makes operating a truck so expensive.
Brake issues do not appear to be significant in EVs. My direct experience is that the brakes are less than half worn at 100,000 miles. Rusty slider pins can happen, but I've never greased mine and I live in the land of salt. There are just an order of magnitude less things to go wrong on an EV than a comparable ICE vehicle. Far fewer moving parts will, on average, result in less maintenance.
Do you live in the rust belt?
Yes I do. Ohio, where we use salt liberally. The thing is, in the winter, when the salt is on the roads, the weather is colder and the car is more likely to use its physical brakes due to battery temperature. It is also true that even when the temperature is cold, there is always some amount of regen available taking load off the brakes. The brakes on my first EV look fantastic at 100k and not at all like a ball of rust.
I haven't done any maintenance on this car at all in 100k miles other than tires and wiper blades, and obviously no maintenance on my wife's EV with 15k on it.
I wonder if this will increase Ford's capacity to produce Maverick Hybrids
Tom1200
PowerDork
12/15/23 3:03 p.m.
This comes as no surprise to me.
We beat this up in the 100 page monster I unleashed on the hive but the long and the short of it is people don't want EVs in significant numbers.......they just don't.
Ford isn't the only slated to cut back on them.
Too expensive, dealer price gouging, availability.
I'm in an area that I should be seeing many of them, and since it's been released, I've seen *one*.
Something is off, and I don't think it is the "eww, EV" factor.
If Ford had produced an extended cab, extended range WT for $40k+- I think they would have sold like hotcakes. I would have certainly bought one.
But when I can buy a used XLT Ecoboost truck for $20k+- that gets 20-30mpg (current driver is averaging 22), the numbers just don't work. They don't even come close when the Lightning extended range is $70k. Over the life of the vehicle, the gas truck is cheaper to buy and operate and at the end of the day, the dollars are all that matter to me.
Expensive vehicles are an emotional purchase, and IMHO, a number of the people buying expensive EVs _want_ other people to know they are driving an EV. I wonder how much the Lightening's mainstream styling is hurting customers' interest. The roads in my area are a sea of trucks, and I'm not sure if I would notice that an F150 was a Lightning if I passed one in traffic.
From a business viewpoint, implementing significantly new products can carry more risks than rewards. But the manufacturers are being pushed into this by the government, and also by fear of being the last one to the party. It would be somewhat simpler if it were allowed to happen organically. It would certainly be less controversial. My understanding is that the F150 EV is actually pulling more robust sales figures, but not by a ton, and not enough to offset overproduction during the last year. As Keith said, it's settling out.
EVs could be the opening that Chinese companies are looking for. On the low end at first, but once trust is developed, they could creep upmarket.
