Do different Lightning models fast charge at different speeds?

[earlyadopt]

Does anyone know if the XLT fast charges at a different rate than a Lariat or Flash since the battery pack is standard and not extended range?

Sponsored

 

[TaxmanHog]

Not that I'm aware of, the DC/DC energy flow is controlled by the system provider, it and the truck does indicate when it should be at a reduced rate.

When the 24's came out, there was a bit of confusion regarding the lowered AC/DC OBC rates translating to the DC rates of charge, Ford issued reassurances via our media contacts that the changes did not impacted the DCFC capacities.

 

[earlyadopt]

Not that I'm aware of, the DC/DC energy flow is controlled by the system provider, it and the truck does indicate when it should be at a reduced rate.

When the 24's came out, there was a bit of confusion regarding the lowered AC/DC OBC rates translating to the DC rates of charge, Ford issued reassurances via our media contacts that the changes did not impacted the DCFC capacities.

Thanks for the update. I agree that the AC/DC is different with the SR battery compared to the LR battery, just not sure if it effected the DC/DC charging.

 

[RickKeen]

The larger ER battery of course takes more time to charge compared to the SR. Not sure if the curves are the same shape, but as a first order approximation, 30% more battery is going to take roughly 30% more time to fill.

 

[detansinn]

The larger ER battery of course takes more time to charge compared to the SR. Not sure if the curves are the same shape, but as a first order approximation, 30% more battery is going to take roughly 30% more time to fill.

The extended range battery can charge at a higher peak and sustained rate. It ends up being a wash when it comes to the charge time, but a charged up ER can go quite a bit farther.

 

[Blainestang]

Does anyone know if the XLT fast charges at a different rate than a Lariat or Flash since the battery pack is standard and not extended range?

Yes, the Standard Range trucks have a lower maximum charging speed (in kW) than the Extended Range trucks. Not by a lot, but the SR maxes out in the 160s kW and the ER in the 170s kW.

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

Does anyone know if the XLT fast charges at a different rate than a Lariat or Flash since the battery pack is standard and not extended range?

15-80% on an SR takes 32 minutes, and it takes 38 minutes on an ER.

With this information, you can extrapolate that the ER adds range faster than an SR. If you look at what the ER will have added (in 32minutes); 71kW (or 178mi of EPA range) compared to the SR which would've only added 64kW (or 156mi of EPA range).

Due to the ER's size and charging curve, it technically adds more range faster than the SR.

All of this assumes:
98kW SR Battery
131kW ER Battery
15%-80% SR Charge Time: 32 minutes
15%-80% ER Charge Time: 38 minutes
EPA Range Estimates of 240mi and 330mi

This is the 2024 charging information released by Ford. The 22-23 DCFC is the same as what's listed, but the 22/23 ER can AC Charge with the FCSP (80a), 15%-100% in 8 hours. The 24 ER can Level 2 charge from 15%-80% in 13 hours.

https://www.ford.com/support/how-to...charging-frequently-asked-questions/#Charging

https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/2023/features/ev-charging/ford-charge-station-pro/

 

[RickKeen]

The extended range battery can charge at a higher peak and sustained rate. It ends up being a wash when it comes to the charge time, but a charged up ER can go quite a bit farther.

Not sure it can on DC supercharger. Rate is going to be limited by the charger and battery temp curve.
I have seen peak power of 175 kW on my SR. Which is the published rated peak of the ER battery as well.

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

Not sure it can on DC supercharger. Rate is going to be limited by the charger and battery temp curve.
I have seen peak power of 175 kW on my SR. Which is the published rated peak of the ER battery as well.

I also saw 175kW+ on my SR. My ER does hold a higher rate, longer, though.

 

[TaxmanHog]

All the precise distinctions between ER & SR are correct, BUT----- the MY 24 changes {ala FLASH} did nothing to those performance curves.

 

[Danface]

Side note, I watched the charging rate drop from about 135kWH down to 93kWH over the course of about a minute using the A2Z adapter at a Telsa station. There was no one else at any of the other 11 stalls so I wondered if it was just Tesla throttling the rate?

 

[Zprime29]

Side note, I watched the charging rate drop from about 135kWH down to 93kWH over the course of about a minute using the A2Z adapter at a Telsa station. There was no one else at any of the other 11 stalls so I wondered if it was just Tesla throttling the rate?

Only way to know for sure is to look at what the truck is requesting via OBDII reader. I watched a couple session with mine and the truck is what lowered the amps as the SC was always providing what was being requested. I've noticed our boost period is a lot shorter in hot weather and I see it going down to 100kW vs holding at 130kW in cooler weather.

 

[Danface]

Only way to know for sure is to look at what the truck is requesting via OBDII reader. I watched a couple session with mine and the truck is what lowered the amps as the SC was always providing what was being requested. I've noticed our boost period is a lot shorter in hot weather and I see it going down to 100kW vs holding at 130kW in cooler weather.

Awesome, I'll do that. I have the OBD Link MX201 and the Car Scanner app for Android.
Thank you!!

 

[Wendy]

I’m noticing that the Charger sends 10% more power than the truck receives. On both Ford Charge Pro and Emporia level 1:
Per Emporia: 85.5kWh added, truck history: 78
Per Ford: 58.202kWh , truck history 54

 

[SilverKlister]

When we're using our AC chargers, level 1 or level 2, the truck is converting the 120V/240V AC to the DC battery voltage with the on-truck charger. That charger is a bunch of power electronics, and it has some power loss, and therefore an efficiency. Besides possible errors in sensing energy flow (kWhrs), the charger is going to dissipate power during the charge. 95% efficiency isn't uncommon for well-designed power electronics. I haven't seen the curve for the on-board Ford chargers, has anyone else? I remember seeing a curve for the Chevy Bolt which peaked around 95% if I remember correctly.

Efficiency = output power/input power. Plugging in your numbers, I get something like 91.2% (Emporia) to 92.7% (Ford). Keep in mind that the output power is measured by the truck and the input power by the EVSE. There can easily be measurement errors in each which skews the overall efficiency number.

FWIW, I used to design power electronics, while I'm not an expert in the design of the AC/DC chargers like what's in our trucks, but I do know something about how they are designed.

DC fast charging is a different beast altogether. The charger on the street directly accesses the truck battery and outputs a DC voltage and current. Those voltage and current numbers are on the nameplate of the device. (I once compared the nameplates on the 150kW and 350kW EA chargers and found the same specs. So, they change the software to limit the output!) There is also an efficiency hit here, but more subtle and perhaps more complex. I believe we get billed for delivered energy (or time on charger, ugh!). Someone else might want to chime in here. Obviously, the battery warms up while charging, so there is still a power loss and efficiency hit too. Looking back on this post, yeah, I guess the battery warms up somewhat while charging on level 1 or 2, but it's got to be a lot less unless you're charging at a high rate, like the 80A Ford charger.

My 2 cents.

Sponsored