If you think that OEM owned charging is a good, scalable path forward we’ll good for you. As for me this is literally the dumbest idea imaginable AT SCALE and will very likely lead to splintered charging standards and thus slowed EV adoption long term. But whatevs..
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Is ford lightening a winner for ford?
- Thread starter meomyo
- Start date
Unlike gas stations, I doubt that DCFC are a money maker, or ever will be. As a result, I could see consortium (like Ionity in Europe, and I guess EA in the US) as a good solution. Since those networks don't belong to a single OEM, they would instead lead to a charging standard (which is what's happening with CCS).
Bingo! My point exactly. Hoping for/waiting for OEMs to jump into the charging pool is not supportable when you talk scale . Oh you can muddle through when you are new and have to build initial infra to support adoption (ie Tesla) but once you cross the chasm that one off st won’t work (for all the reasons others have stated). The EV America/Canada and ionity approach is more in the right direction but barring an obvious profit potential I think it will fall back to govt - basically it’s no different than any other infrastructure (roads, bridges, L3 chargers … you get the point)
I see charging infrastructure as being similar to cellular infrastructure. Initially, cellular carriers built out towers and networks, then they charged or worked with competitors to support out-of-area roamers to use their equipment. Eventually, many of the towers were consolidated to tower companies who leased space to multiple carriers on their towers.
In order to get started, especially when Tesla is running away with the early EV charging market, making their cars the only really viable ones for long-distance travel, they'll need to help build out their charging network. Eventually, they may be able to turn them over to 3rd party service providers.
Unfortunately, their obstructionist efforts through the SAE in the late 2000's and early 2010's to ensure poor and incompatible charging standards from Teslas has made this a bit more difficult that it would have had to be. However, unless they want Tesla to own the market, they will have to do something to seed a viable network. Some of us early Tesla customers helped seed the charging infrastructure in the early days but I haven't seen much intelligent grassroots efforts by non-Tesla EV drivers. Therefore, it will be up to the OEMs if they want to continue to sell cars.
Personally, I have zero faith in the government doing anything viable. All of previous US government attempts to build out charging infrastructure have been miserable failures and I see nothing changing that would cause any future efforts to succeed.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
You're not in Kansas anymore... the situation is very different in California.
A large number of early adopters have free lifetime charging for Model S/X.
Hell ya. This was exactly my experience when I visited CA. The superchargers are permanently occupied by old Model S owners. It's really good Tesla had no car-to-grid capabilities, ha ha. Good thing the number of old Model S cars with unlimited free charging is limited, and limited to coastal CA, mainly. I'm sorry about CA. Good I live near Kansas.
I don't agree that most people charging at CA Superchargers are old S/X with Lifetime Free Unlimited Charging. I spend time in CA and other places. There are a lot of 3's and Y's, many of whom pay for their Supercharging. I suspect the reason so many of them us Superchargers is that the 3 and Y are so popular in CA that many would rather have a Tesla than a home where they can charge it. Since their lives are so tied to social networking and their wireless devices, they can spend it at a Supercharger just as well as in their tiny apartment living rooms. Supercharging in CA also isn't that much more than home electricity costs.
This situation is totally different for EA, EVgo, Chargepoint, and other charging service providers who generally charge between 2X and 3X the cost of residential electricity.
While Superchargers are in heavy local demand, the expensive CCS/CHAdeMO stations aren't -- although I'm seeing more cars at them now that other viable EVs that can use them are proliferating.
Here in Georgia, I also witness locals depending on local Supercharger stations exclusively in the urban areas of Atlanta. In our more suburban areas, not so much.
When I visited family in Palm Springs 3 years ago, that was the only time I ever struggled to find empty spots to Supercharge. California's just different.
When I visited family in Palm Springs 3 years ago, that was the only time I ever struggled to find empty spots to Supercharge. California's just different.
CA is roughly half of all Tesla sales in the US. So, the number of Tesla per capita in CA is multiple of what it is in any other state. Tesla has basically replaced the German carmakers in the luxury market. Since about a third of all Californians live in some multi unit housing, the SCs are pretty busy. The good news is that Tesla has been building up the SC infrastructure at a really fast clip here.
You'd think Tesla would build out enough Superchargers to match their sales in California but it takes time I guess.
Somehow, a 300-mile target range battery adds almost $20k bringing the MSRP of the XLT over $74k. I don't expect many will chose a 230-mile target range battery. At 10%-90% working range and 70% off the nominal range due to load/weather, this battery gets you about 120-130 miles of range between the charges, making the F-150 an expensive city car for occasional trips to a local mall.
I believe Ford either grossly overestimates the interest of buyers in F-150 EV or intentionally plays as if there were a huge long-lasting interest to game the stock market. The F-150 EV is THE SAME F-150 as an ICE version with some add-ons and a large frunk (which I find conceptually a great idea). The owners will have to care about charging and driving habits in addition to paying over $80k the SAME truck that can be purchased at $50k without range and charging worries. I like EVs, but if I have a choice between a $60k Model Y EV and a $40k Model Y ICE, I'd get an ICE car.
I literally never get the listed range of my M3P.
No way the Lighting does. Also look at some of the recent tests with the Rivian and towing…..1/3 range, stopping 20 times towing over a short trip. If anything if significant weight is towed or in a payload in the bed, the Lighting will get 100 miles at best. Might be fine for in town work maybe. I guess we’ll see soon enough!
No way the Lighting does. Also look at some of the recent tests with the Rivian and towing…..1/3 range, stopping 20 times towing over a short trip. If anything if significant weight is towed or in a payload in the bed, the Lighting will get 100 miles at best. Might be fine for in town work maybe. I guess we’ll see soon enough!
Needsdecaf
Active Member
Why no way?
Supposedly the Ford ratings factor in a 1,000 lb payload.
Plus, many other EV's meet or beat their EPA range, because they don't use the full testing method that Tesla does and de-rate voluntarily. It's not uncommon for a 220 mile Taycan to easily go 265 miles. Whereas in my "290" mile M3P, I'm lucky to barely crack 200.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Agreed, you have to read the fine print to calculate the actual price.
Ford launches F-150 Lightning online configurator, starts at $40,000 but $74,000 for bigger battery
Ford has launched the F-150 Lightning’s online configurator and revealed all prices and options in the process. It starts at...
electrek.co
"The first important thing that you should notice is that the Pro version is only available with the “Standard Range Battery” and the Platinum only comes with the “Extended Range Battery.” This leads us to the most important information that the configurator confirms: how much you have to pay to get the bigger battery pack. Ford grabbed a lot of headlines by announcing that the Ford F-150 Lightning would start at $40,000 and has a range of up to 300 miles.
But now we learn that to get the 300 miles of range, you need to buy a $74,000 version of the electric pickup truck."
"Ford has done some chicanery that ramps up the price significantly for the bigger pack. As you can see above, the bigger battery pack is $10,000, and as we previously mentioned, you need to select the $53,000 XLT trim to be able to select the Extended Range pack. That brings you up to a reasonable $63,000, but Ford also locks in a $9,500 equipment group if you choose the bigger pack on the XLT, which brings the price up to $74,000."
TessP100D
Active Member
300 mile EV truck just doesn’t work. It’s 400+ for me or an ICE. Learned my lessons.
To be fair most other current EVs vendors get their listed range (or actually noticeably higher in the case of Porche). Tesla seems to be the only current EV vendor with “optimistic” range statements. Note I also have a (2018) M3P and I never get close to the stated 310mi when I bought it. Yet the two people I work with who have Taycans (4S) get ~280-300mi on the hwy in the Midwest. Funny thing is their listed range per Porche is only 220 while my M3P is listed at 310 yet they get better range (my car is now stating 268 at 100%).
Thus I would be surprised if Ford didn’t EXCEED it’s listed range. Now towing….I doubt it would get even half. But very few (none?) of the truck owners I know actually haul stuff. Willing to bet 80% of current F150/truck buyers will ever actually tow anything. Most are soccer mom/mall cars from what I can see.
Needsdecaf
Active Member
Agree with you on towing. This has been borne out by Model X owners. Range really drops.
80% of drivers don't tow...in your area maybe. Come to the South. I grew up in North East. You need to live in an area like mine to believe the way people use (abuse) trucks.
But honestly, if you're towing regularly..I'd get the hybrid. I wouldn't get the EV. And I say that as an EV fan.
