Official 2022 F-150 Lightning Specs, Pricing, Photos & Videos!

[HawkeyeOD]

No thanks. Mediocre range at best and it’ll be even worse if you try to pull literally anything with it.

The infrastructure just doesn’t exist for these to really catch on. At least not where I live. Too expensive for most people too.

Sponsored

 

[Catmandu]

What is with the Canadian pricing?? Base model is XLT is $39,974 USD, but is reserving in Canada at $68,000 CDN?

WTH? Currency exchange only brings it to $49,000. I've got a reservation, but I'm not sure I will pay that premium.

 

[Pedaldude]

Once again, the same limitations on every current EV is going to inform how Ford decides to equip the Lightning.

Li-ion battery energy densities are notably deficient compared with gasoline. The gasoline engine has the advantage of only needing to carry 1/15th of the needed products of combustion. For every pound of gasoline burned, you're also using roughly 14 pounds of air. When you have burned through 22 gallons of gasoline, your truck is going to be 140lbs lighter and you will have sucked literally a ton of air through the intake manifold. The battery pack is going to weigh exactly the same full as empty and by it's very nature, it's going to require storing 100% of the energy used. The same as if you had to store 2,000lbs of air in your truck to burn the 22 gallons of gasoline.

To increase the range, not only would you need to increase the size of the battery to get more range but you would need to increase the size of the battery to carry around the extra weight of the battery. It would also reach the point where you have added so much battery weight to the vehicle, the range will decrease. That's not including the fact that bigger motors will be needed to move the larger battery.

If the battery weight is 1,800lbs and it has a 300 mile range, doubling that might get you an extra 100 miles because now the truck is always carrying 3,600lbs of battery weight and now you have zero payload. This is all rough guesses and assumes relatively flat terrain! I would also guess that the standard range battery weight is the same as the extended range battery, only with less expensive individual li-ion cells. Exaggerated example but probably not too far from reality, especially when steep hills are thrown in and regenerative braking can't do its part.

I don't think the battery technology is ready for replacing gasoline trucks for towing or 600 mile a day roadtrips. I don't think Ford intended to with the Lightning. However, I feel that at least half the trucks being used as daily drivers today could easily be replaced with a 100% battery powered truck and nobody would know the difference.

Anyone who is complaining about the range of any EV needs to be mindful of this and how incredible it is that the technology is competitive at all. Despite the promises of higher energy density with newer technology like solid state batteries, gasoline might never be exceeded in its current range and convenience.

There's mention of the truck only being available in Supercrew with a 5.5' bed, however, the image for the 'commercial oriented model' is unavailable at Ford.com. The difference is around $12,000 though and I wonder if it actually will be a single cab with only one motor and not as much battery pack as the XLT?

The IRS and full belly pan shows that Ford is serious. One thing that could possibly extend the range at the extent of looking odd would be full fender skirts on at least the rear. Lowering the suspension 2" and chopping the top could also eke out a few extra miles on the highway!

As of now, Cybertruck is merely a concept car and I really hope that if it does go into production, that either it's fully self driving, or the windshield is revised to provide better visibility. I have put some miles behind the wheel driving the Lotus Esprit, which has miserable visibility and I can only imagine how much worse it would be with a truck. Audi had the same problem, the engineers decided that a steep windshield angle would be best for aerodynamics. The rally drivers complained enough that the race cars had revised, less steep windshields. The less accomplished, every day drivers had to make do with the harder to see out of cars!

GM has let slip some details about the new EV Hummer and it's going to be very heavy. They have also announced that a Silverado fleet EV is in the works, they're the only ones so far with real world experience making battery electric trucks with the old school S-10 EV. GM is claiming that the fleet truck will have a 400 mile range.

Another detail to keep in mind, is just like horsepower in the 60's, the manufacturers have been fudging the numbers. Since there are various precautions on discharging a lithium ion cell below 15-20% as well as charging above 90-95% capacity. If that holds true for the Lightning, it could mean that the 300 mile range is closer to 225 miles before any miles are driven. Either that or the marketing department thinks that Ford buyers might be less EV savvy and not in on the joke, so were more conservative about their ratings. Testing in the Mach-E suggests the latter. If Ford is underrating the Lightning battery, then that's the reason for the seemingly disappointing range compared to Tesla who readily admit to using unrealistic battery range estimates.

99% of the charging infrastructure already exists and apart from the highway system, power lines have changed the landscape of this country more than anything. The addition of charging stations will be a nominal expense for the power companies if it means getting a portion of the cash that gas stations are now getting, it's much easier and cheaper to put in a charging station in a remote area than a gas station and the power supply is already there. No need for sending out tanker trucks or other support needed and while you only need twenty bucks to buy an old oil drum and steal 55 gallons of gas with a garden hose. It's a lot more expensive and I imagine slightly more sophisticated to store stolen electricity. So it's much less of a risk now to leave charging stations unattended.

 

[Pedaldude]

What is with the Canadian pricing?? Base model is XLT is $39,974 USD, but is reserving in Canada at $68,000 CDN?

WTH? Currency exchange only brings it to $49,000. I've got a reservation, but I'm not sure I will pay that premium.

The 'base model' is not XLT, it's whatever they decide to call the 'commercial-oriented' model. XLT starts at $52,974, so far, they don't seem to think it's that important to even have a fake picture of the base model:

So who knows if the $39,974.991/3¢ model will even be accessible for the average consumer, it might be a stripped down fleet only configuration that they know nobody would order, maybe even without AC, possibly even manual crank windows.

 

[RT21KRH]

Neat concept but until I can get myself up to the cottage or camp trip and back on a single charge, I'll pass. The thought of having to pull off my route (who knows how far off) and sit and wait while it charges up (for who knows how long) is a deal breaker for all these electric vehicles. Until the technology advances and we can start seeing more practical mileages (and in cold climates like here in Ontario), these EV vehicles just don't appeal to me. I do think it looks pretty cool though. Lots of use of the word "projected" makes me a bit apprehensive as well....

You are exactly right. It will work if you spend the day around town working hauling etc then charge at night. Even that will get old and if you forget you’ll be late to work! I routinely travel 550 miles in 7.5 hours there is just no way to do that. And if you want to go 1000 miles it’s not one day but 2 long days and a hotel. Hook up a trailer and the lake/cabin better be close that’s for sure. It’s cool I like the engineering it just seems Li ion batteries are not the solution long term... isn’t that why Honda is working on hydrogen?

 

[Catmandu]

....

The 'base model' is not XLT, it's whatever they decide to call the 'commercial-oriented' model. XLT starts at $52,974, so far, they don't seem to think it's that important to even have a fake picture of the base model:



So who knows if the $39,974.991/3¢ model will even be accessible for the average consumer, it might be a stripped down fleet only configuration that they know nobody would order, maybe even without AC, possibly even manual crank windows.

Thanks for this! This pricing makes sense to me now. I'd be OK with a stripped down version.... Maybe not w/o AC though lol!

 

[brx]

I agree with everyone that says it needs more range.. maybe make an option to forego the frunk and use it to add range to the vehicle. A 300-mile range gets me to most of my customer sites and back - but would have me screwed when I get that inevitable 'drive right back' emergency call.

 

[Oneand0]

I agree about the range. If you are driving as much as I’ve seen some of you say you do, you will need to stick to a gas tank F-150. For me this will work. I have 2.5 years left before I retire and have to drive 162 miles from Lake Tahoe to Concord, California (SF Bay Area) and spend a couple nights, then drive home, once a week. That’s perfect. I fill up before I leave for home and I have a lot to spare, and charge at home overnight. The capabilities of this truck with California power outages cannot be underestimated.

This video shows how amazing this vehicle is if you don’t drive those insane miles daily, or do much towing. I’m in with two reservations, one for my retired dad and one for me.

 

[F150fan]

As someone who just went through the Bronco hype only to end up ordering a 2021 F-150, prepare to be underwhelmed.

I see a lot of the same promises sprinkled with disclaimer language. I think everyone at bronco6g would agree that Ford is not shy (or graceful) about going "oops, yea we're actually not going to do that, sorry."

 

[Brian Head Yankee]

I agree about the range. If you are driving as much as I’ve seen some of you say you do, you will need to stick to a gas tank F-150. For me this will work. I have 2.5 years left before I retire and have to drive 162 miles from Lake Tahoe to Concord, California (SF Bay Area) and spend a couple nights, then drive home, once a week. That’s perfect. I fill up before I leave for home and I have a lot to spare, and charge at home overnight. The capabilities of this truck with California power outages cannot be underestimated.

This video shows how amazing this vehicle is if you don’t drive those insane miles daily, or do much towing. I’m in with two reservations, one for my retired dad and one for me.

We used to live in Tahoe and Dublin before that. There is a fast charge station in Folsom at the Intel plant. A lot of Teslas from SoCal would stop there and top off before heading up the hill. I am sure there will be a super charge station for Ford soon, if not already. Check the charge station locator site. You should be fine for that run up the hill.

 

[dothedew]

Most people don't tow with their trucks. Most people don't even haul anything but people and dogs with them regularly. This will work for a majority of folks. I've got 300 miles range on my Model 3 and 250 miles range on a Kia Niro and neither of them have I ever had one iota of range anxiety. We take the Telluride on trips if we need to go far. And for people that don't have half a dozen cars like me they can rent for the one-two weeks a year they trip like that.
For people towing regularly or road tripping all the time, this isn't the truck for them and thats OK.

 

[SpicyChimichanga]

this is what people want! Not the cybertruck.

 

[audiomikej]

One wish list item: 6 passenger seating option for both XLT and Lariat trims.

 

[upslash]

I'm impressed with the price, but disappointed with the range. Was hoping for 300 mile range standard, with 400 extended.

However, I will say that this truck would meet my needs around town. I would only need additional range on trips.

 

[bluestarct]

Once again, the same limitations on every current EV is going to inform how Ford decides to equip the Lightning.

Li-ion battery energy densities are notably deficient compared with gasoline. The gasoline engine has the advantage of only needing to carry 1/15th of the needed products of combustion. For every pound of gasoline burned, you're also using roughly 14 pounds of air. When you have burned through 22 gallons of gasoline, your truck is going to be 140lbs lighter and you will have sucked literally a ton of air through the intake manifold. The battery pack is going to weigh exactly the same full as empty and by it's very nature, it's going to require storing 100% of the energy used. The same as if you had to store 2,000lbs of air in your truck to burn the 22 gallons of gasoline.

To increase the range, not only would you need to increase the size of the battery to get more range but you would need to increase the size of the battery to carry around the extra weight of the battery. It would also reach the point where you have added so much battery weight to the vehicle, the range will decrease. That's not including the fact that bigger motors will be needed to move the larger battery.

If the battery weight is 1,800lbs and it has a 300 mile range, doubling that might get you an extra 100 miles because now the truck is always carrying 3,600lbs of battery weight and now you have zero payload. This is all rough guesses and assumes relatively flat terrain! I would also guess that the standard range battery weight is the same as the extended range battery, only with less expensive individual li-ion cells. Exaggerated example but probably not too far from reality, especially when steep hills are thrown in and regenerative braking can't do its part.

I don't think the battery technology is ready for replacing gasoline trucks for towing or 600 mile a day roadtrips. I don't think Ford intended to with the Lightning. However, I feel that at least half the trucks being used as daily drivers today could easily be replaced with a 100% battery powered truck and nobody would know the difference.

Anyone who is complaining about the range of any EV needs to be mindful of this and how incredible it is that the technology is competitive at all. Despite the promises of higher energy density with newer technology like solid state batteries, gasoline might never be exceeded in its current range and convenience.

There's mention of the truck only being available in Supercrew with a 5.5' bed, however, the image for the 'commercial oriented model' is unavailable at Ford.com. The difference is around $12,000 though and I wonder if it actually will be a single cab with only one motor and not as much battery pack as the XLT?

The IRS and full belly pan shows that Ford is serious. One thing that could possibly extend the range at the extent of looking odd would be full fender skirts on at least the rear. Lowering the suspension 2" and chopping the top could also eke out a few extra miles on the highway!

As of now, Cybertruck is merely a concept car and I really hope that if it does go into production, that either it's fully self driving, or the windshield is revised to provide better visibility. I have put some miles behind the wheel driving the Lotus Esprit, which has miserable visibility and I can only imagine how much worse it would be with a truck. Audi had the same problem, the engineers decided that a steep windshield angle would be best for aerodynamics. The rally drivers complained enough that the race cars had revised, less steep windshields. The less accomplished, every day drivers had to make do with the harder to see out of cars!

GM has let slip some details about the new EV Hummer and it's going to be very heavy. They have also announced that a Silverado fleet EV is in the works, they're the only ones so far with real world experience making battery electric trucks with the old school S-10 EV. GM is claiming that the fleet truck will have a 400 mile range.

Another detail to keep in mind, is just like horsepower in the 60's, the manufacturers have been fudging the numbers. Since there are various precautions on discharging a lithium ion cell below 15-20% as well as charging above 90-95% capacity. If that holds true for the Lightning, it could mean that the 300 mile range is closer to 225 miles before any miles are driven. Either that or the marketing department thinks that Ford buyers might be less EV savvy and not in on the joke, so were more conservative about their ratings. Testing in the Mach-E suggests the latter. If Ford is underrating the Lightning battery, then that's the reason for the seemingly disappointing range compared to Tesla who readily admit to using unrealistic battery range estimates.

99% of the charging infrastructure already exists and apart from the highway system, power lines have changed the landscape of this country more than anything. The addition of charging stations will be a nominal expense for the power companies if it means getting a portion of the cash that gas stations are now getting, it's much easier and cheaper to put in a charging station in a remote area than a gas station and the power supply is already there. No need for sending out tanker trucks or other support needed and while you only need twenty bucks to buy an old oil drum and steal 55 gallons of gas with a garden hose. It's a lot more expensive and I imagine slightly more sophisticated to store stolen electricity. So it's much less of a risk now to leave charging stations unattended.

Range will be an item that rules the Lightning out for some people that do a lot of long distance hauling. The hybrid is a better option for them or the F250 or F350 if they are doing hauling heavy loads.

However, most F150 buyers today don't even own a trailer. They are buying trucks for the perceived occasional run to Home Depot or Lowes. They are not pulling a fith wheel or even a small flatbed trailer for a lawn mower.

People buy trucks so they can say they have a truck instead of a sedan or SUV. Are trucks with moon roofs really a work truck? Ford's Platinum and Limited F-150s are just fancy sedans on a truck platform.

There are lots of people that use a truck as a truck. But today, there are way more trucks with empty beds driving around.

Sponsored