Silverado EV 2025 Estimation on Reservations

[BennyTheBeaver]

Actually, the lead designer for the Lightning says that from day 1 they were designing a BRAND NEW PLATFORM for the Lightning - the chassis and rails and everything 'under' the cab and bed of the truck is BRAND NEW. The 'look' of the Lightning as compared to the F150 Supercrew is what is more 'stock', even though, as you can imagine, a lot of that is still DIFFERENT.

Ford wanted the Lightning to LOOK like an F150, not that it was using existing F150 parts, even though you can also imagine that they would, for what parts that would continue to fit the new design.

Sorry, I disagree.

They developed on the F-150 Platform/chasis to be able to get an EV Truck on the market ASAP. The secondary reason is an easier transition point for traditional ICE truck owners to jump to EV. While the Lightning is without a doubt an EV, it is an EV in an ICE body.

The changes you are referencing are not EV optimizations, they are designing around the constraints and dimensions of the ICE platform/chasis.

EV optimizations (aero, weight, interior functionality, range) will come in the 2nd gen Lightning. I fully anticipate Ford's next gen Full Size truck to be as similar to their ICE F-150 as the new Chevy EV Silverado is to their ICE Silverado.

It will be interesting to see if their mid size EV Truck will be based off the Ranger chasis or if it will be a fresh design.

Sponsored

 

[lightspeed]

Yeah the Ford approach makes perfect sense. They leverage the massive buying power of 6 million units (per generation) and just make the carriage new-ish.

The question is, what further benefits can be had by switching to a unibody design on a skateboard? GM is committed to their ultium EV platform which forces them to use the skateboard design, but is that really the best design for a truck? Trucks still use body on frame for a reason. The Silverado EV is apparently going to have 1300lb payload which is pretty bad.

800v/350kW charge rate is independent of being unibody. So Ford could drop in those changes at any time and hopefully they will, plus a 200kWh battery option dammit!! They also need to fix the charge curve to not crater at 80%.

My opinion is that Ford can make it more aero/lighter/heatpump/efficient and that's nice I guess, but they need to focus on towing capability (so it's not just a giant car) which means more battery and better charge rates. Weight and aero can't get them there because those small gains are overwhelmed by the inefficiencies of the pulled trailer.

 

[greenne]

Yeah the Ford approach makes perfect sense. They leverage the massive buying power of 6 million units (per generation) and just make the carriage new-ish.

The question is, what further benefits can be had by switching to a unibody design on a skateboard? GM is committed to their ultium EV platform which forces them to use the skateboard design, but is that really the best design for a truck? Trucks still use body on frame for a reason. The Silverado EV is apparently going to have 1300lb payload which is pretty bad.

800v/350kW charge rate is independent of being unibody. So Ford could drop in those changes at any time and hopefully they will, plus a 200kWh battery option dammit!!

My opinion is that Ford can make it more aero/efficient and that's nice I guess, but they need to focus on towing capability (so it's not just a giant car) which means more battery and better charge rates. Weight and aero can't get them there because they are overwhelmed by the inefficiencies of the pulled trailer.

As batteries get more space efficient I wonder if the Lightning could easily be retrofitted with an upgraded "new" battery a few years down the road. That's probably difficult with the EV specific design.

My opinion is that for trucks/SUVs the "benefits" of the EV specific platform are overstated. I just don't see a huge benefit there and many drawbacks vs going with an adapted ICE design.

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

The biggest advantage is a redesigned body for aerodynamics. That alone could have significant towing range increase potential.

I hate the silver door wedge that is the CT, but that design is really about aerodynamics.

 

[sotek2345]

As batteries get more space efficient I wonder if the Lightning could easily be retrofitted with an upgraded "new" battery a few years down the road. That's probably difficult with the EV specific design.

My opinion is that for trucks/SUVs the "benefits" of the EV specific platform are overstated. I just don't see a huge benefit there and many drawbacks vs going with an adapted ICE design.

One change I could vs. the ICE chassis is a wider frame. This doesn't matter for the ICE trucks since it just has to be wide enough for the drivetrain, but on an EV truck, a wider frame means more room for batteries.

 

[Lime Green]

The biggest advantage is a redesigned body for aerodynamics. That alone could have significant towing range increase potential.

I hate the silver door wedge that is the CT, but that design is really about aerodynamics.

The same aerodynamic modifications would apply equally as well to an ICE vehicle. But manufacturers have traditionally been too conservative to make radical changes and they see a shift to EVs as a good reason to massively reevaluate and innovate. ICE designs are also more restricted to certain shapes due to the size of that engine and transmission.

I hated the CT design until I saw it in person. Some things are a bit quirky but the overall design makes a lot of sense when considering use of space, aero, ease of manufacturing.. it may take some time for the truck market as a whole to accept it visually but it’s probably going to be a great truck.

 

[lightspeed]

The biggest advantage is a redesigned body for aerodynamics. That alone could have significant towing range increase potential.

I hate the silver door wedge that is the CT, but that design is really about aerodynamics.

I don't think so. It would improve the not-towing range, but would have negligible affect on towing range because the aero/drag would be dominated by the towed vehicle.

 

[VTbuckeye]

I don't think so. It would improve the not-towing range, but would have negligible affect on towing range because the aero/drag would be dominated by the towed vehicle.

Exactly. Until you aero optimize the trailer (both coefficient and surface area) tow vehicle optimization will make little difference with a large trailer.

Napkin math time: if towing a trailer yields half of the efficiency as not towing, then the drag contributions are equal. Our hypothetical EV truck at baseline uses 500 watt hours per mile. When towing, truck plus trailer uses 1000watt hours per mile. If the tow vehicle has it's efficiency optimized so that it uses 20 percent less than unoptimized it would use 400 watt hours per mile. While towing it would use 900 watt hours per mile. It is also probable that some of the non-towing optimizations will be themselves negated by adding a trailer (getting the air to separate and create less drag behind the truck will be it make be a difference with a trailer behind the truck). Basically both the tow vehicle and towed vehicle need to be optimized in tandem.

 

[bmwhitetx]

Talked to a Chevy rep today at the State Fair of Texas where they had the Silverado EV on display. Definitely looks better in person. I asked for an update on timing and they said looking at opening orders next summer for production in the fall and first vehicles would arrive late 23 to dealers. Said they weren't providing dealers demo units so no chance to test drive first. But that you would be able to test drive your vehicle when it arrives and then decide.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

As batteries get more space efficient I wonder if the Lightning could easily be retrofitted with an upgraded "new" battery a few years down the road. That's probably difficult with the EV specific design.

My opinion is that for trucks/SUVs the "benefits" of the EV specific platform are overstated. I just don't see a huge benefit there and many drawbacks vs going with an adapted ICE design.

Of course we’d all love to upgrade to a bigger battery, at a reasonable price, fairly soon. But the unfortunate truth is that all manufacturers will be bottlenecked by battery supply for the next decade. So they will direct whatever supply they have to building and selling new vehicles, none left for any other uses.

 

[Roy2001]

Talked to a Chevy rep today at the State Fair of Texas where they had the Silverado EV on display. Definitely looks better in person. I asked for an update on timing and they said looking at opening orders next summer for production in the fall and first vehicles would arrive late 23 to dealers.

Only $100k+ model available initially until late 2024 you will see lower priced trims.

What I don't understand is why the payload is only 1300lb. F150L is up to 2200lb+. 1300lb is not for a working truck.

I hope Ford would keep the current Lightning line if they decide to change the new Lightning design to something like Silverado EV. Then we have the Lightning Classical and the New Lightning.

 

[astricklin]

As batteries get more space efficient I wonder if the Lightning could easily be retrofitted with an upgraded "new" battery a few years down the road. That's probably difficult with the EV specific design.

My opinion is that for trucks/SUVs the "benefits" of the EV specific platform are overstated. I just don't see a huge benefit there and many drawbacks vs going with an adapted ICE design.

It's entirely possible. If you look at the Nissan leaf, there are 4 different kWh capacities available and they can all be retrofitted fairly easily into even the early year models.

However, with an entirely new, ground up EV truck on the way in 2025, I don't see Ford really making any changes to the lightning in the battery or drivetrain areas other than the change to lfp batteries in the sr packs that has already been announced.

 

[vandy1981]

I hate the silver door wedge that is the CT, but that design is really about aerodynamics.

Remember the Aerostar, Ford's OG wedge design? It beat the Cybertruck's Cd by 0.01. There's no practical reason why the next F150 EV couldn't look like this, other than being ugly.

 

[lightspeed]

But you'd be giving up the frunk which is one of the best things about an electric truck. The CT tries to make up for the low nose by enclosing the entire bed in an electric tonneau cover.

I doubt Ford will change anything anytime soon, but I think they made a mistake in not offering a 200kWh option.

Now that I've had plenty of time to think about the Lightning pros/cons, I think Ford should have made it it's own trim level and all Lightnings would be that trim (like the Tremor for example). Ford should not sell any zero margin versions like the Pro/XLT but instead put 200kWh+ batteries into the high margin trucks. Lightning should have been a halo truck up front, and then they could bring the price down over time into the regular trim levels.

Instead, most of the press is, whether you agree or not, it's a great truck that can't do truck things like tow and this is the impression that most people are (accurately) getting. Would you buy a V8 ICE F-150 that had a 16 gallon gas tank that took 45 minutes to fill? Now add in 20%(?) range loss in cold weather and it gets even worse.

This is not a popular opinion here which is fine. I get that for most people it is a local commuter car, that they'll rarely or never tow, and rarely go on long trip, so it works for their needs.

 

[vandy1981]

But you'd be giving up the frunk which is one of the best things about an electric truck

Getting rid of the frunk has benefits aside from aero. It would allow them to move the cab forward and include a 7-8 foot bed within the same overall length. It would also be a boon for forward visibility and pedestrian safety. Ford made the right call with the 1st-gen Lightning's conservative styling but there's definitely room for innovation on truck design.

Sponsored