The F150 EV Lightning thread

Keith Tanner said:

They may run it lower to the ground for better aero. All the various photos do look like it's relatively low, especially compared to a 4WD. I wouldn't be surprised if there were lowering kits on the market fairly quickly due to the performance abilities of the vehicle.

It'll never be an old Ranger from the standpoint of bed height because the truck is simply in a different size class.

Yes it's a 4x4. Because Minnesota & snow.
     I have a small plastic step stool if I have to get anything in the bed or check the oil etc. ( 5'9" ) 

 My 5' wife needs my help to get in. I'll

Production has started, and the embargo for early driving reviews was lifted this morning. There are a bunch of them out there, but the ones that I've seen have all been very positive. It seems like it's just a quieter, faster F150 with no emissions and cheaper operating costs. This review covers a lot of details that others don't:

Ford just dumped some of it's Rivian stock. I wonder if that means increased confidence in the Lighting, or if they are just moving money around...

They still own 10%, but maybe they are signaling their opinion of Rivian?

Ford selling Rivian shares

In reply to SV reX :

Ford wasn't allowed to sell any shares until 180 days after the Rivian IPO.  Called a "lockup period" if you wanna look into it more.

I think that instead of Ford's increased confidence in the Lightning it was more that the public perception of Rivian itself is bad right now.  Their stock has lost 80% of its value since November. 

Ford and others still have a lot of value in the remaining shares of Rivian that they own.

Autopian has a good deep dive on the Lightning.

https://www.theautopian.com/the-2022-ford-lightning-is-just-a-standard-f-150-with-an-electric-powertrain-and-thats-why-its-going-to-change-the-world/

Sad trombone for towing range with the Lightning in this real world test...

I would have preferred a test against a gas F150, but the results with the Lightning were still pretty dismal even if you disregard the comparison.  And they didn't even have any serious grades to deal with on their route.

The Lightning wouldn't even get our current trailer and NA Miata to our closest track in a single charge.

https://tfltruck.com/2022/06/video-how-far-can-a-gas-truck-an-electric-ford-lightning-go-towing-the-same-camper-on-one-fill-up/

In a second test the Lightning had excellent performance pulling near its max rating up a serious grade, but used 16% of battery capacity to go 8 miles.  Even with downhill regen, that's gonna make for a short trip if mountains are in your routes.

Sounds like the Lightning might be a winner if you want max efficiency and only need to tow short distances around town, but it's not going to cut it for most of us that need to go 100+ miles to a racetrack, and/or have mountains in the equation.

Separate mountains from towing, as EVs do seem to work just fine with elevation changes. Regen is a great trick. That hill climb test would have been a lot more interesting if they'd measured the energy recovery going back down. It wouldn't be 100%, but it will definitely be more than zero.

Towing is always going to be a tough nut for EVs. You're expending enormous amounts of energy, especially if you're trying to drag the maximum load up a steep grade. 

A racing friend of mine is seriously considering a Lightning to replace his old diesel pickup. He's looking at towing times and costs and even considering a zero-time diesel fillup, he figures the cost savings for the electric equate to about $40/hour. Which is an interesting way to look at it. This is a guy who has cannonballed an EV from CA to NY and back. 

Another way to look at it is kW used per hour. You can work backwards from ICE efficiency for this somewhat. He's using 100 kW per hour for a pickup with a good sized trailer, and a couple of friends have come up with a similar result from different directions. So a towing pickup will need 100 kWh of battery capacity to tow for an hour, then it will need to take on 100 kWh of energy. 

I have a real problem with towing people. There is no standard towing load.  Period.  Not on Semi's or medium duty nor on the 1/2 ton pickup.  
    How much time is spent with no load,  1/2 load, or overload?  Then what is the trailer?  Two wheel, 4 wheel, bias ply, or radial? What size tires?   How big is the trailer?   I mean is it the size of a house or is it a little canoe trailer? 
      Really almost every load is different.   
  Then there is traffic.  Or wind,  how cold is it?    Where do you start, where do you finish?   Yes terrain but terrain is different east to west or west to east.  Same with the individual highways.
  Remember the average American travels 31 miles per day.  Yes what sets the average?  San Francisco,or Iowa. Even what part of Iowa. The eastern part is fairly hilly while western is pretty flat.   Just that little list of variables  I can think of off the top of my head  should give you an idea of the impossibility of providing valid information.  
     Even as guidelines,   2 trucks with identical loads  testing just those variables will not tell the owner anything of value. 
    I towed a enclosed tandem axle 16' trailer hauling my Jaguar  all over the country, over the Rockies And Sierra Nevadas, North and South, East & West,  with a little Chevy  S10  and never in over a decade had the least problem.  
     Yet some people towing a similar trailer with a 1 ton diesel pickup had problems. Blowing up transmissions, mechanical problems.  Accidents, etc. 
     
      

In reply to Keith Tanner :

How do you drive an EV for maximum range?  I've found driving EFI  many speed transmission different from the old carburetors and early 3 speed automatics.  
    I now drive an EFI daily aggressively  until I'm in the upper gears because it spends less time ( and fuel) than in lower gears.    Before, with carbs, the accelerator pump was the enemy of mileage.  So I gently accelerated  and lifted to encourage the transmission to shift at slower speeds. 
    Now I always seem to get better fuel mileage than others driving the same vehicle.  
     So is the peak torque of an EV  beneficial to greater range so aggressive speed gain will yield greater range.  Or should one ease an EV up to speed for optimum range?  

Saw the first one in the wild Cars & Coffee this am.  Interesting animal.

Aerodynamics will make a huge difference for towing range. It's not unusual to see a 30% difference in gas mileage between a flatbed car hauler and an enclosed trailer of similar weight. 

In reply to ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) :

I have seen that exact number when towing in tandem. Almost identical trucks, one towing a Miata in an enclosed trailer and one with a Miata on an open trailer. 30% fuel difference. 

We will likely start seeing more emphasis on trailer aero. 

In reply to frenchyd :

On an ICE, they're most efficient when you have the throttle wife open and at lower engine speeds. Just don't trigger the acceleration pump/enrichment. It's usually a little more finely judged in an EFI engine, but it's still there. It's a function of how fast you move the throttle, not how far.

I don't think there's an equivalent loss with an EV, so it comes down to smoothness. Use regen as much as possible and maintain a relatively constant speed because acceleration costs energ. Friction brakes are wasted energy. 

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to frenchyd :

... they're most efficient when you have the throttle wife ...

I don't know anything about throttle wives, but just the term makes me uncomfortable.

In reply to frenchyd :

A true comparison has even more variables, most notably what the owner started with. If it's his first truck, it's fairly straightforward to calculate cost per mile. OTOH, if the owner already has a truck and is being drawn to the Lightning just because it's an EV, that complicates matters by introducing more variables. The cost of the truck out the door could buy a LOT of gasoline or diesel, so then there's how often it's driven, how far, cost of fuel, both electric and liquid, etc, etc.

Somewhat related, I just retired, and before that, had seriously considered an EV. It no longer makes sense for us because I drive about 90% less, such that fuel cost doesn't impact us much, so I stick with my gas F150.

It's what Apple felt I meant. Who am I to disagree. 

I read the most recent Car and Driver article on the Lightening (Ford Bets Big - July/August 22).  Based on their towing numbers, I would have to stop and charge 3 times to get to Road Atlanta with my race trailer.  With my ICE I now do it in 5.5 hours.

Maybe the subfloor of the trailer could be more batteries with a umbilical cord up to the truck.  

Right now it only works as a car that looks like a truck, that isn't used as a truck....

This from someone that wants EV to suceed.

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to frenchyd :

On an ICE, they're most efficient when you have the throttle wife open and at lower engine speeds. Just don't trigger the acceleration pump/enrichment. It's usually a little more finely judged in an EFI engine, but it's still there. It's a function of how fast you move the throttle, not how far.

I don't think there's an equivalent loss with an EV, so it comes down to smoothness. Use regen as much as possible and maintain a relatively constant speed because acceleration costs energ. Friction brakes are wasted energy. 

I always assume that but does it take less energy to get to speed quickly and then drive as steadily sensitive to terrain. Or to accelerate slowly up to speed?  ( in an EV ) 

I would guess the latter. My reasoning is that the waste heat in the system is related to I^2 * R, so the current drawn has a disproportionate effect. Let's assume that accelerating hard probably take at LEAST 10X the current as speeding up slowly, but it'll generate (wastes) 100X the amount of heat.

Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) said:

I read the most recent Car and Driver article on the Lightening (Ford Bets Big - July/August 22).  Based on their towing numbers, I would have to stop and charge 3 times to get to Road Atlanta with my race trailer.  With my ICE I now do it in 5.5 hours.

Maybe the subfloor of the trailer could be more batteries with a umbilical cord up to the truck.  

Right now it only works as a car that looks like a truck, that isn't used as a truck....

This from someone that wants EV to suceed.

Or are you willing to trade off a bit of charging time for all of the other attributes? If the primary goal of the vehicle is to tow a given load a long distance in the minimum elapsed time, ICE is going to win because of how fast fresh energy can be onboarded. But that's not the only use case of a truck.

frenchyd said:

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to frenchyd :

On an ICE, they're most efficient when you have the throttle wife open and at lower engine speeds. Just don't trigger the acceleration pump/enrichment. It's usually a little more finely judged in an EFI engine, but it's still there. It's a function of how fast you move the throttle, not how far.

I don't think there's an equivalent loss with an EV, so it comes down to smoothness. Use regen as much as possible and maintain a relatively constant speed because acceleration costs energ. Friction brakes are wasted energy. 

I always assume that but does it take less energy to get to speed quickly and then drive as steadily sensitive to terrain. Or to accelerate slowly up to speed?  ( in an EV ) 

It's all just delta-v. The question is not how much energy it takes because that's always the same, but how much is wasted. Given the efficiency of an EV drivetrain compared to the inefficiency of an ICE, I suspect the difference is pretty minor between different levels of street acceleration.

I have a friend who's added extra displays to his Tesla so he can see heat rise, etc. Last time I asked about rates of acceleration it was in the "makes no functional difference" range. 

Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) said:

I read the most recent Car and Driver article on the Lightening (Ford Bets Big - July/August 22).  Based on their towing numbers, I would have to stop and charge 3 times to get to Road Atlanta with my race trailer.  With my ICE I now do it in 5.5 hours.

Maybe the subfloor of the trailer could be more batteries with a umbilical cord up to the truck.  

Right now it only works as a car that looks like a truck, that isn't used as a truck....

This from someone that wants EV to suceed.

You failed to give the needed information.  ( mileage involved ).  Is your truck capable of pulling a trailer  for 5.5 hours without refueling?   Is your bladder capable of lasting 5.5 hours between relief?   Are you capable of driving 5.5  hours without stopping for a meal?  
      I'll assume that like me you'd need to refuel at least once over a trip like that.   If you combine it with a trip to the mens room,  and a brief meal. You've taken the same 1/2 hour needed to recharge once.  
    Yes in that trip you might need two more stops so you add an hour to the trip.   Better remember to add another hour for the trip back.  
  How many times a year do you tow that far?  2-3 times?   So you've added 6 hours to your year.   
  Now, Let's do the math to figure out what you've saved per year.  I'll assume $5 a gallon adjust as prices change.  The annual mileage is a shade over 13,000  ( my own F 150 Is over 16,000 miles per year since I bought it) 

     Is 18 mpg OK?  Adjust to your reality.  
      That's $3611. Annually 

At my electric rates that works out to be $462 annually. ( plus whatever 6 fast charges costs, I understand the first two years are included ) 
 So for those 6 hours.  I'd save $3149  or well over $500 hr.  Now that seems a lot to me.  So please double check my math and adjust it for me.  

Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) said:

Right now it only works as a car that looks like a truck, that isn't used as a truck....

I mean trucks have a lot of uses that aren't medium to long distance towing. For hauling stuff around town or short distance towing (taking the boat to the local lake, etc) I'm sure it's just fine.

The gas F150 isn't even the best Ford truck for towing a race car cross-country :) It's okay not to be the best at everything as long as you're the best at something.

In reply to dps214 :

Well said.  Mine does daily commuting duty plus hauling all the stuff for construction my Jaguar Group 44Tribute car, future XKE  and all the required detritus for my home projects. Not to mention putting boat in and out of the Lake  annually.   

dps214 said:

Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) said:

Right now it only works as a car that looks like a truck, that isn't used as a truck....

I mean trucks have a lot of uses that aren't medium to long distance towing. For hauling stuff around town or short distance towing (taking the boat to the local lake, etc) I'm sure it's just fine.

Yup, it'll do just fine for contractors, trips to home depot, towing a dump trailer or a landscaping trailer around town.

Hauling big trailers on 300 miles trips with an EV is going to need to wait til batteries are cheap enough that they can put 900 miles' worth of (unladen) range into the truck at a reasonable price point.  That's fine, there's plenty of market in trucks for people who don't do that.