Fast charging efficiency by Edmunds places F150 Lightning near the bottom

[Mike Dubs]

This is disappointing. If we could get the ~800 mi/hr charge rate of the Ioniq 6, we could fully recharge in <30 minutes. That would be a significant improvement. Article is linked here:
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html

Sponsored

 

[Maxx]

Surprised by difference between EV6 Wind and Lucid Air.

 

[jetfixr1]

This is disappointing. If we could get the ~800 mi/hr charge rate of the Ioniq 6, we could fully recharge in <30 minutes. That would be a significant improvement. Article is linked here:
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html

The Ioniq 6 is an 800V battery.

 

[Texas Dan]

Not that bad considering the Lightning is just about the biggest vehicle on the list. If you want Ioniq 6 charging speeds then you should buy a Ioniq 6. If you want/need an electric truck that can tow 10,000 pounds then you should buy a Lightning.

 

[GarageMahal]

mi/hr charging rates are highly impacted by the vehicles efficiency (i.e. mi/kWh) and is therefore a very subjective comparison.... but everybody is fixated on range

 

[swajames]

posted before, and largely as pointless and deceptive now as it was when others posted it when it was first released.

The miles per charge hour broadly and unrealistically assumes the initial fast charge rate is sustained for an hour, and it takes no account of charge curve and so on. Where the Lightning does well is curve, it can sustain over 100 KW right up to 80% SOC.

 

[TheWoo]

This is disappointing. If we could get the ~800 mi/hr charge rate of the Ioniq 6, we could fully recharge in <30 minutes. That would be a significant improvement. Article is linked here:
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html

At the EPA rated 2.4 mile range, 800 miles per hour would be equivalent to 333 kW charge rates. Lucid Air doesn't peak there, let alone stay there for any amount of time.

We'd all love faster charging, but even the fastest charging current production vehicle would get less that that with the Lightning's efficiency. As others have said, mph is a bad way to compare charging speeds.

 

[flux capacitor]

I am disappointed they did not include battery size since that does have an effect on how fast it charges. If the Ioniq 6 had the same size battery as the Lightning it would probably be the same amount of time, but the Ioniq 6 would have like a 1600 mile range or something crazy.

 

[Danface]

I am disappointed they did not include battery size since that does have an effect on how fast it charges. If the Ioniq 6 had the same size battery as the Lightning it would probably be the same amount of time, but the Ioniq 6 would have like a 1600 mile range or something crazy.

My guess is it would be pretty similar think of the overhead of battery weight and the amount of space needed to hold the batteries and the weight of material needed to support the weight of the batteries.

In WWII, they discovered that planes could fly the same distance with less fuel because it didn't have the added weight of the fuel to lug around.

OK, the aerodynamics of the F-150 is similar to a brick so it will be interesting to see what the Cyber Truck mileage will be.

 

[voxel]

posted before, and largely as pointless and deceptive now as it was when others posted it when it was first released.

The miles per charge hour broadly and unrealistically assumes the initial fast charge rate is sustained for an hour, and it takes no account of charge curve and so on. Where the Lightning does well is curve, it can sustain over 100 KW right up to 80% SOC.

Sorry to burst your bubble but my former Ioniq 5 consistently achieved 230 kW (3C) from 40-80% while my former Rivian R1S struggled to keep 130 kW in that same range.

Large EVs like the Lightning and Rivians need to be 800V. Sub 200 kW (1.5C) charge speeds are not acceptable on an EV with a 130+ kWh battery pack and poor efficiency.

 

[Grease Lightning]

Sorry to burst your bubble but my former Ioniq 5 consistently achieved 230 kW (3C) from 40-80% while my former Rivian R1S struggled to keep 130 kW in that same range.

Large EVs like the Lightning and Rivians need to be 800V. Sub 200 kW (1.5C) charge speeds are not acceptable on an EV with a 130+ kWh battery pack and poor efficiency.

My lightning charges just fine, my range is great, and my efficiency is better than the CyberTurd. Not sure why yours sucks so bad, but maybe it is your unrealistic expectations

 

[voxel]

My lightning charges just fine, my range is great, and my efficiency is better than the CyberTurd. Not sure why yours sucks so bad, but maybe it is your unrealistic expectations

I never owned a CyberTurd. I own a Mach-E and know how slow Ford EVs charge.

I owned a Rivian R1S for about 8 months and found the 1C charge rate tooooo slooooow.

3C of the E-GMP should be the norm. You notice Rivians and Lightning sitting at EA locations for an hour? That's because of the slow charging.

EVs are great commuter vehicles - that's what my Mach-E is for. Road trips? Big fat pass.

 

[Kev12345]

gen2 lightning will be

 

[potato]

Large EVs like the Lightning and Rivians need to be 800V. Sub 200 kW (1.5C) charge speeds are not acceptable on an EV with a 130+ kWh battery pack and poor efficiency.

Different things are acceptable to different people.

Sponsored