F-150 Lightning's Estimated Driving Range Shows Incredible 472 Miles

[codeman]

lol even if it's 472 miles (which it won't be as soon as you step on the pedal, load the truck, or turn on your AC) it's still not as good as the 5.0L Coyote for range.

What happens when the road is filled with EV's and everyone needs to battle for a spot to top-up your electric vehicle? Then what? All seems OK now for the small % of EV owners finding new charge stations; even though most EV owners are a bit too dense to admit it's annoying having to wait 30-60 minutes for a charge.

Essentially, long road-trips or long haul drives are going to be a thing of the past once 'critical mass' of EV's is hit. Another case of this "green energy" nonsense only helping fringe cases, rather than the reverse. Not to mention ... "green energy" is a bit of a misnomer entirely. You're still shifting energy resources, and different points of manufacturing around ... albeit in a more sneaky way with these EVs. Typical.

Sponsored

 

[greenne]

lol even if it's 472 miles (which it won't be as soon as you step on the pedal, load the truck, or turn on your AC) it's still not as good as the 5.0L Coyote for range.

What happens when the road is filled with EV's and everyone needs to battle for a spot to top-up your electric vehicle? Then what? All seems OK now for the small % of EV owners finding new charge stations; even though most EV owners are a bit too dense to admit it's annoying having to wait 30-60 minutes for a charge.

Essentially, long road-trips or long haul drives are going to be a thing of the past once 'critical mass' of EV's is hit. Another case of this "green energy" nonsense only helping fringe cases, rather than the reverse. Not to mention ... "green energy" is a bit of a misnomer entirely. You're still shifting energy resources, and different points of manufacturing around ... albeit in a more sneaky way with these EVs. Typical.

Show me where the EVs hurt you...

Seriously? Do you not possibly envision a future where gas stations are replaced with charging stations? Do you not think that we will have innovation that allows for 500, 600, or 1000mi of range and/or the ability to charge in 5-10min? (Perhaps inductive charging on the road as you drive along).

But sure..lets go ahead and keep throwing copious amounts of pollution in our air..making it hard to breathe and letting the planet burn up.

Fact is EVs are much cleaner than ICE vehicles ever will be, even accounting for the manufacturing process. That is the fact today..only to get more apparent as we transition to cleaner energy.

 

[F-150 Prius]

lol even if it's 472 miles (which it won't be as soon as you step on the pedal, load the truck, or turn on your AC) it's still not as good as the 5.0L Coyote for range.

Any EV pickup will fall short of range, especially towing, compared to any old engine from last century. It's going to be years before battery charge density is equal to gas/diesel. The good news is the trend has been favorable: reduction in cost of batteries, increase in capacity (google the Tesla 4680 battery) and reduction in time to charge. Even so, it will be years before EVs do well as road trip vehicles when the purpose is to reach the destination at the highest possible average mph with the quickest possible total trip time (including charging.)

What happens when the road is filled with EV's and everyone needs to battle for a spot to top-up your electric vehicle? Then what? All seems OK now for the small % of EV owners finding new charge stations; even though most EV owners are a bit too dense to admit it's annoying having to wait 30-60 minutes for a charge.

Charge point overcrowding is already happening every holiday weekend at Tesla Superchargers. Electrify America simply does have enough EVs on the road to be overcrowded, but their network is also more sparse and does not yet really support "go anywhere" road trip touring, so there's not the demand to bring about overcrowding.
Once Rivian adds their network of 3500 chargers to existing fast charge points, hopefully the influx of Rivian vehicles will be met with sufficient additional capacity in the network.

Even so, their plan is to be able to add 140 miles' range in 20 minutes … to me, that's still far too slow to replace an F-150 Hybrid, but for a weekend trip not covering too many miles beyond the initial range of the Rivian, I know from years of experience with the Tesla Model X, it works out okay, but it's still silly to be sitting in a Supercharger for an hour when you want to just get to the destination and be doing what you want instead of serving the needs of a vehicle with technology that just isn't up to the task yet. And again, Rivian is talking about 2023 for their network … early days.
https://rivian.com/experience/charging

Essentially, long road-trips or long haul drives are going to be a thing of the past once 'critical mass' of EV's is hit. Another case of this "green energy" nonsense only helping fringe cases, rather than the reverse. Not to mention ... "green energy" is a bit of a misnomer entirely. You're still shifting energy resources, and different points of manufacturing around ... albeit in a more sneaky way with these EVs. Typical.

Here I think it's not so grim as you might expect. Government and carmakers have the only thing they respond to: profit motive. They'll build out the fast charging EV network because there's money in it for them. It's already happening in the US (VW repaying its diesel fraud case penalties) and around the world. Tesla has shown that "it can be done" … in many regions of California, the rapid sales of the Tesla Model Y have been met with so-called "Urban" Superchargers … 72kW (instead of the normal 150 and 250kW Supercharger pedestals) located in consumer malls and strategic locations for commuters.
Also, trucks, taxis and commercial fleets. The other thing that builds out EV networks is the commercial fleets. When Amazon puts 100,000 Rivian delivery vans on the road (around the world, some to be made in the UK) they won't be expecting those vans to run all day without fast charging.) Numerous fleet buyers have announced contracts to buy EVs large and small.
Still, we're talking 2023 and beyond … who knows what will happen to battery technology by then and who knows what politics will play out as the oil industry going into its death throws and uses billions of dollars and lobbyists to manipulate governments and buy themselves even one more day of selling "burn stuff" technology … it's been shown that's how previous EV initiatives failed … by obstructing carmakers from building EVs, the oil industry is a seven trillion dollar market generating hundreds of billions per year … at even a quarter billion per day, that's a lot of incentive to obstruct EVs from getting to market and slow-walking legislation that would improve the usefulness of EVs.

For now, for the next few years, you're basically correct on all counts except road trips and long haul driving won't disappear into the past, at least not in the next decade. But it looks like the auto industry will, in one model year lifecycle (typically 5-7 years) offer EVs for most private vehicle owners. Long haul and towing will still need a gas engine, but it will probably be a plug-in hybrid. There's also the prospect of Hydrogen in two ways: as a fuel cell (expensive and complex) and as hydrogen injection (fuel source injected into a combustion engine from a fuel tank, just like natural gas vehicles … something the auto industry would like because it allows them to continue to monetize the cost of energy and get people standing in oily puddles breathing toxic fumes to pour money into the gas tank. That's what the oil and auto industry fear about EVs: electricity is already very cheap, gets cheaper all the time and is trending towards zero for consumers that have their own solar or access to grid solar. EVs have very low maintenance costs and low operating costs (except for insurance, which is still a racket because EVs are expensive to repair and Tesla has been unprepared to meet the supply side logistics of the auto collision repair industry.)

 

[codeman]

Show me where the EVs hurt you...

Seriously? Do you not possibly envision a future where gas stations are replaced with charging stations? Do you not think that we will have innovation that allows for 500, 600, or 1000mi of range and/or the ability to charge in 5-10min? (Perhaps inductive charging on the road as you drive along).

But sure..lets go ahead and keep throwing copious amounts of pollution in our air..making it hard to breathe and letting the planet burn up.

Fact is EVs are much cleaner than ICE vehicles ever will be, even accounting for the manufacturing process. That is the fact today..only to get more apparent as we transition to cleaner energy.

It is not a fact at all that EV's are "much cleaner than ICE vehicles will ever be ..."; in fact, the only true fact here is that we can't accurately calculate the overall difference in energy consumption and pollution throughout the entire manufacturing chain. In large part, because access to that information is not available for various reasons.

Production, mining and transportation of various materials and products used in developing electric vehicles is just as harmful to the environment; it's just tracked and recorded in different ways. While I do agree in exhaust pollution of older vehicles (you can really tell when a 1957 Ford rolls down the road as it smells like your local marina) is a problem, the efficiency and regulations put in place on newer vehicles makes them cleaner than ever. The focus on C02 emissions as the main talking point is laughable at best.

There are still vast amounts of oil and gas consumed during the process of manufacturing, and even running of EV's. Where did all the plastic come from and materials to create those 1 ton battery packs I wonder?

EV's are cleaner in some ways, but will cause different sorts of pollution and by-products in other ways. The energy grid, being one of them as further capacity needs to be continually added. You've seen nothing yet, when "80%" of the population is driving an EV. What's the percentage now, 5-10% in some of the areas that are more conducive to EV ownership?

You know what causes more pollution and climate effects? Cramming millions of people into small spaces, in dense cities and urban communities where there are less trees, more pavement, more buildings, and a more densely populated area of energy consumption. It creates hot-spots.

But yes ... argue away with me I have no clue what I'm talking about ....

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

In my opinion...I'm not sure I fully buy into the overcrowding, especially since there is movement to increase infrastructure.

As long as the infrastructure growth outpaces the EV growth (and by EV growth I mean the small fraction of EV users that regularly need a charger on the go vs charging at home) this shouldn't be a big deal. Infrastructure for charging stations doesn't have to outpace total EV sales, it has to outpace demand for remote charging.

I plan on charging at home and for 99.9% of my trips will never need a remote charger, I believe the majority of these owners will do the same because; home charging is cheaper, and most people do not drive a tanks worth of gas/battery range in a day

I think the majority of arguments against stated range and charging infrastructure are made by the 0.01% that do drive significantly more than the average person.

To those people that are concerned about range and charging availability...maybe this vehicle just isn't for you. That's fine, stick with a ICE until your needs are met by a different or future vehicle. Major auto manufacturers will never engineer towards the 0.01%, expecting a vehicle that solves every issue every driver might have would be prohibitively expensive and thus wouldn't appeal to the masses.

Yes, I can see holiday weekends being bogged down for the 1-4 times a year a mass of people will road trip during a holiday. However, on the other side of the argument, you also see Gas shortages when a crisis hits (or perceived crisis hits). In Oregon, during holidays, there are often 20-30 minute waits at gas stations.

Again, just my opinion.

 

[Nick Gerteis]

It is not a fact at all that EV's are "much cleaner than ICE vehicles will ever be ..."; in fact, the only true fact here is that we can't accurately calculate the overall difference in energy consumption and pollution throughout the entire manufacturing chain. In large part, because access to that information is not available for various reasons.

Production, mining and transportation of various materials and products used in developing electric vehicles is just as harmful to the environment; it's just tracked and recorded in different ways. While I do agree in exhaust pollution of older vehicles (you can really tell when a 1957 Ford rolls down the road as it smells like your local marina) is a problem, the efficiency and regulations put in place on newer vehicles makes them cleaner than ever. The focus on C02 emissions as the main talking point is laughable at best.

There are still vast amounts of oil and gas consumed during the process of manufacturing, and even running of EV's. Where did all the plastic come from and materials to create those 1 ton battery packs I wonder?

EV's are cleaner in some ways, but will cause different sorts of pollution and by-products in other ways. The energy grid, being one of them as further capacity needs to be continually added. You've seen nothing yet, when "80%" of the population is driving an EV. What's the percentage now, 5-10% in some of the areas that are more conducive to EV ownership?

You know what causes more pollution and climate effects? Cramming millions of people into small spaces, in dense cities and urban communities where there are less trees, more pavement, more buildings, and a more densely populated area of energy consumption. It creates hot-spots.

But yes ... argue away with me I have no clue what I'm talking about ....

You’re grasping at straws. EVs are going to build market share surely but slowly, giving the grid plenty of time to supply the extra electricity. And that extra electricity will almost all come from clean, renewable sources. Just keep watching, the next few years will be interesting times and all your tired talking points will be disproven over and over again.

 

[F-150 Prius]

You’re grasping at straws. EVs are going to build market share surely but slowly, giving the grid plenty of time to supply the extra electricity. And that extra electricity will almost all come from clean, renewable sources. Just keep watching, the next few years will be interesting times and all your tired talking points will be disproven over and over again.

There's been credible studies on the miles an EV has to drive to be as clean as an ICE – taking into consideration every ton of emissions or waste from mining raw materials to recycling the vehicle.
Here's one of many reports on a recent comparison. In short, EVs start out dirty but drive their way to being cleaner than an ICE in the first year. In some countries or where energy is derived from solar, it's sooner, in China, where it's all coal, it's much longer, but the EV wins out in all scenarios, if not by as much as some EV devotees would wish to believe.

 

[greenne]

There's been credible studies on the miles an EV has to drive to be as clean as an ICE – taking into consideration every ton of emissions or waste from mining raw materials to recycling the vehicle.
Here's one of many reports on a recent comparison. In short, EVs start out dirty but drive their way to being cleaner than an ICE in the first year. In some countries or where energy is derived from solar, it's sooner, in China, where it's all coal, it's much longer, but the EV wins out in all scenarios, if not by as much as some EV devotees would wish to believe.

Most reports say between 1-5yrs EVs become cleaner than ICE, with 5yrs based on a "worst case" scenario of electricity grid powered by coal. Coal is quickly disappearing as a power source and vehicles lasting way more than 5 yrs.

The comparison isn't even close....

 

[Blainestang]

the only true fact here is that we can't accurately calculate the overall difference in energy consumption and pollution throughout the entire manufacturing chain.

And yet you follow that up with a bunch of direct and indirect claims about EVs being "just as harmful to the enviroment."

Which one is it? We don't know? Or EVs are "just as harmful?"

 

[F-150 Prius]

In my opinion...I'm not sure I fully buy into the overcrowding, especially since there is movement to increase infrastructure.

I plan on charging at home and for 99.9% of my trips will never need a remote charger, I believe the majority of these owners will do the same because; home charging is cheaper, and most people do not drive a tanks worth of gas/battery range in a day

Overcrowding at EV charge points is already a problem, not limited to holidays, but exacerbated by obvious supply-demand imbalance of road trip holiday weekends. Here's a report from Europe this weekend (and there's numerous reports from the last few years at US Superchargers, just google for photos and videos of insane lines, people getting into fights, etc.)


I've cued the video to one example of this youtuber's road trip. At other charge points you can see the chaos and confusion when people don't cooperate (e..g charing a "slow" Leaf at a "fast" charging pedestal.)

Charging at home, waking up every day to a "topped up" EV is the way to go. Anyone getting an EV without a clear solution to charging is going to be disappointed – that's what Ford has to be careful about with the Mach-e and Lightning so that enthusiastic early adopter customers don't end up becoming a generation of people who sell their first EV with a sour taste and reluctance (and telling everyone they know how EVs are trouble.)

 

[BennyTheBeaver]

Overcrowding at EV charge points is already a problem, not limited to holidays, but exacerbated by obvious supply-demand imbalance of road trip holiday weekends.

I can see Overcrowding at some specific EV charge points is already happening (such as in Europe), but it definitely is not network wide. The USA is also growing that infrastructure and with other companies like Tesla opening up their networks, and increasing charging speed, the bottlenecks will become fewer and fewer.

Again, the opinion I was trying to make was:

As long as the infrastructure growth outpaces the EV growth (and by EV growth I mean the small fraction of EV users that regularly need a charger on the go vs charging at home) this shouldn't be a big deal. Infrastructure for charging stations doesn't have to outpace total EV sales, it has to outpace demand for remote charging. Meaning it needs to grow faster than the <0.01% of adopters that will regularly be needing remote charging solutions.

 

[EaglesPDX]

Most reports say between 1-5yrs EVs become cleaner than ICE

The actual data says EVs are cleaner from day one, zero emissions vs. 5 tons of emissions per year for an equivalent ICE.

As for the electricity generation emissions being tagged onto the EV, even using a dirty grid calc like Missouri or other coal powered states, the EVs are way ahead but that is a false measure as people spending $15k more for an EV will also spend more purchasing sustainable non polluting electricity from the utility.

The other phony argument is that the battery mfg emissions are tagged on to the EV but you'll find all the battery mfg are new plants with zero net emissions themselves.

And when the oil and auto companies put out the false numbers, they never include the mfg emissions for the ICE vehicles or the mfg emissions for oil extraction and refining.

Sponsored