do i need bigger battery upgrade if only using 1 or twice a year of long road trips?

[playjack]

hi all, new to forum! hope all is well. had a early reservation & likely will get my 2022 f150 summer 2022. i am on budget & will order XLT in canada (starting C$68K) & debating if going with bigger battery or save my $10K. working as sales man covering greater vancouver & max mileage for work is only 100 Mi/day & averages 50 Mi. planning to use truck on summer road trips like banff (likely the farthest-518 Mi) probably 1 or twice per year. Not towing over 5K lbs if ever. how inconvenience are EV's on long road trips & will a bigger battery lessen the inconvenience to warrant the C$10K. what do you guys think? thanks for chipping in. jack

Sponsored

 

[sotek2345]

I am in a similar situation, with family vacation road trips a couple to a few times a year. The ER battery is worth it to me to make those trips easier, to get the extra power+performance, and to get the whole home power backup (Charge station pro included). I also only plan to keep the truck for 3-4 years before trading up to a newer model, so I should get most of the cost back on the trade/sale.

 

[gorwell]

This really comes down to tolerance for charging times for your road trips.

Load up https://abetterrouteplanner.com/ and put in some of your road trips and see how long the charging times are. This isn't "exact" but it's a good enough estimate based on the current known specs.

Ex:

the 230 range for 400 mile road trip (in California) would take an extra 90 minutes of charging (2 to 3 stops depending on charging placement).

the 300 range for same trip would take an extra 60 minutes of charging (1 stop).

Best case scenario, maybe you save 15 minutes on both those times.

For me, those are both bad

The F150 DC charge speeds, in my mind, are already outdated. This can certainly be regional -- around me there are plenty of 350kw chargers to use, maybe elsewhere they aren't as common so being able to charge faster isn't as key right now.

I'm personally just getting the Standard Range Pro Trim. Save the extra cash and put it towards a new car with the next generation batteries down the road.

In US$, the Pro is saving ~$14K from XLT. And, ~$22K from XLT w/ Extended range.

I would be paying w/ Cash, Let's say I put that $22K in the stock market (VTSAX) for 6 years, return rate of 8%, contribute $100 monthly... at the end of that 6 years I have $44K towards a new truck. $44K in 2027 is going to buy a much better truck. So, I get to be an early adopter now and get something better later for roughly the same perceived cost.

 

[RonTCat]

hi all, new to forum! hope all is well. had a early reservation & likely will get my 2022 f150 summer 2022. i am on budget & will order XLT in canada (starting C$68K) & debating if going with bigger battery or save my $10K. working as sales man covering greater vancouver & max mileage for work is only 100 Mi/day & averages 50 Mi. planning to use truck on summer road trips like banff (likely the farthest-518 Mi) probably 1 or twice per year. Not towing over 5K lbs if ever. how inconvenience are EV's on long road trips & will a bigger battery lessen the inconvenience to warrant the C$10K. what do you guys think? thanks for chipping in. jack

The question will be... how comfortable will you be driving around with 10% of the battery left? Likely you will see that condition in the winter. If this is a concern, and you don't like having to constantly know where the nearest charge station is "just in case", get the ER battery.

 

[Ciancagl]

I also read that Ford is going to use OTA updates to get more Range out of the batteries. I’m in sales and take occasional trips to the beach 2hrs away. Will be going standard range.

 

[greenne]

This really comes down to tolerance for charging times for your road trips.

.............

The F150 DC charge speeds, in my mind, are already outdated. This can certainly be regional -- around me there are plenty of 350kw chargers to use, maybe elsewhere they aren't as common so being able to charge faster isn't as key right now.

This 100%^^

Almost all the new EA chargers ware//will be capable of 350Kw.

I don't know why Ford couldn't/wouldn't future proof the Lightning(to a certain extent) by allowing 800v(350KW?) charging. Porsche is offering it on the Taycan, Hyundai/Kia are offering it on their new EVs(Ioniq 5//ev6).

Maybe its a battery safety issue?(Ford being cautious). I wonder if it is possible to upgrade the Lightning to 800v with OTA, or is that a hardware thing?

 

[adoublee]

This 100%^^

Almost all the new EA chargers ware//will be capable of 350Kw.

I don't know why Ford couldn't/wouldn't future proof the Lightning(to a certain extent) by allowing 800v(350KW?) charging. Porsche is offering it on the Taycan, Hyundai/Kia are offering it on their new EVs(Ioniq 5//ev6).

Maybe its a battery safety issue?(Ford being cautious). I wonder if it is possible to upgrade the Lightning to 800v with OTA, or is that a hardware thing?

Agreed it could have been and maybe should be better. However, I don't think we know the charge curve across the entire SOC % of battery yet, which can make just as much difference or more in recharging than advertised peak kW. This is supposedly a mass market vehicle and the mass of EA chargers are going to be 150kW for a while. So if nothing else, let's encourage Ford to get their charge curve appropriately conservative (not over conservative) and tuned in BEFORE vehicle release. This "will significantly improve with firmware updates" attitude should not be taken for this vehicle.

 

[Aspesi4]

I struggle with this as well. We have a mini van for long family trips. The F150 would be replacing my Chevy Volt which has 36,000 miles on it with 92% which have been electric. So that means within the 50 mile range of the Volt, I've covered the majority of miles as an EV.

The extra range for me is just a comfort and future proofing thing. Between the cold reduced range winters, the battery degradation, the possibility of pulling a small camper, realistically I don't need it, but paying the extra 7K will help with all these concerns.

I'm also waiting to see what the EV Tax Credit will be once this whole Reconciliation Bill is unveiled.

 

[PandaSlash]

It's probably more reassuring to do so, but as people have stated it depends on your tolerance for charging.

Just one other thing to consider climate. I know Vancouver has a decent summer climate, but the winters there are cold. Good thing you said "summer to Banff" as if it was a winter trip then I'd say yes do the ER. Like all batteries, cold weather will decrease range in EVs, however I'm not sure if the Lightning has a heat pump or any part to keep the battery warmer in the cold. I've only driven to Banff from Calgary, not Vancouver, but the mountains might ding your range if towing (but of course you will regenerate on the downhills).

 

[sotek2345]

Agreed it could have been and maybe should be better. However, I don't think we know the charge curve across the entire SOC % of battery yet, which can make just as much difference or more in recharging than advertised peak kW. This is supposedly a mass market vehicle and the mass of EA chargers are going to be 150kW for a while. So if nothing else, let's encourage Ford to get their charge curve appropriately conservative (not over conservative) and tuned in BEFORE vehicle release. This "will significantly improve with firmware updates" attitude should not be taken for this vehicle.

Based on the quoted recharge times and estimated battery sizes, the charging curve has to be about dead flat at 150kW on the ER battery. It is the only way to hit the times they are advertising for fast charging.

 

[Diabolical!]

I am going ER for 2 reasons.

1.) I take a trip to Disney World from New Orleans once a year. Would definitely prefer fewer stops with faster charging.

2.) Resale value. Range anxiety is real. There will come a time when I am ready to buy another truck and I believe by that time, 500+ mile range will be the standard on new EVs. It will be hard enough to unload a truck that gets 300 miles of range by then, let alone a truck that gets 230.

 

[Pilot2022]

I have some real concerns with this vehicle such as range, charging speed, 2-3 year product cycle etc. Still, I am in line to get one if the price makes sense. You are not going to find a 4 Door/4WD EV with so much room and capacity for 33K with EV credit. I am planning to buy and hold as long as needed and it won't be my only vehicle, so should work for most of my needs. In 10 years, hopefully there is replacement battery available...even if not, I won't regret low price and gas savings over this time.

I realize that Canadian prices are higher. I wouldn't spend 70-80K on a truck like this.

 

[Brian Head Yankee]

Some of you are not doing a fair comparison between ICE and EV on a long trip. If you go on a 7 hour, 400 mile trip with an ICE, you will be stopping for gas and at likely one meal. When you factor the ADDED time to charge an EV, it is negligible in my opinion. I will time my trips to coordinate a meal with every charge stop. My wife an I stop every two to three hours on out long trip from Las Vegas to Tahoe that takes 9 hours. We stretch our legs, grab a drink or a meal and enjoy the break. In the Lightning I will be stopping at the same places and spend an extra 15 minutes at each one.

My suggestion: Leave earlier and enjoy the ride!

 

[Blainestang]

This really comes down to tolerance for charging times for your road trips.

Load up https://abetterrouteplanner.com/ and put in some of your road trips and see how long the charging times are. This isn't "exact" but it's a good enough estimate based on the current known specs.

Not sure why, but abetterrouteplanner has the charge times way off for the Lightning.

I ran a few trip calcs and the charge times are far too long in some cases.

One charge from 10% to 49% is estimated to take 40 minutes, for instance, and it's a location with 150kW chargers.

Another time it said 15%-69% took 49 minutes.

Those are way off.

Basically the ER charges at 150kW from 15% to 80%, so it's very easy to figure out how long it should take to charge. And it only takes 41 mins to go from 15-80%, so both of those are way off.

If the charge goes >80%, it could add a LOT of time if the rate drops like the Mach E does, but it's clear on the ones where charging completes at <80% that ABRP's numbers are bad. Not sure why.

 

[gorwell]

Not sure why, but abetterrouteplanner has the charge times way off for the Lightning.

I ran a few trip calcs and the charge times are far too long in some cases.

One charge from 10% to 49% is estimated to take 40 minutes, for instance, and it's a location with 150kW chargers.

Another time it said 15%-69% took 49 minutes.

Those are way off.

Basically the ER charges at 150kW from 15% to 80%, so it's very easy to figure out how long it should take to charge. And it only takes 41 mins to go from 15-80%, so both of those are way off.

If the charge goes >80%, it could add a LOT of time if the rate drops like the Mach E does, but it's clear on the ones where charging completes at <80% that ABRP's numbers are bad. Not sure why.

Yah, I noticed that -- my CYA was to say you could see 15 minutes better on my times

Sponsored