Why isn’t the Lightning getting more of the gas F150 market?

[Grumpy2]

CA is talking about radically changing the consumer’s vehicle choice in less than 15 years from the original executive order. A dozen or so states follow CA’s laws by statute.

It should be considered that we are gaining more knowledge about the damage to the earth's environment done by burning oil. At least 66% of American's are concerned about climate change. We very well might not have 15 years to take decisive action.

Sponsored

 

[B177y]

The mandates are, IMHO, the biggest factor in the negative reception to EV's and cause the most "one side vs. the other" mentality.

I was absolutely in the camp of EV distrust due to the mandates. While the lead, smoking, and garbage incineration are good examples of govt mandates, the alternatives didn't cause a direct change to the consumer as far as daily living. Paint was still available, gas was available, the garbage got picked up and taken away, you could still smoke if you wanted to, etc... Mandating that a consumer can't choose the car that they want and the alternative has some huge differences in range, operation, and price, plus the necessity to plan trips down to minor details is a major turnoff for most consumers that want to get in a car and drive. The car culture of driving and freedom is ingrained in most American car buyers, and a mandate to take that away is an insult.

I live in a fairly rural area and frequent rural areas for recreation. I only came to love EV's after test driving an MME on a whim, while I was walking into the dealership with a salesperson to sign papers on a new Ford Edge (ICE). After the test drive, my mind was blown. I went home and researched EV's and MME's for a week before purchasing one. The driving experience and the stories and experiences of the macheforum convinced me that it was worth the effort to transition away from ICE and that I could still drive my kids to their travel soccer games in Seattle round trip all on a single charge at home. A few road trips and one year later after purchasing the MME, I traded to the Lightning as I was now familiar enough and trusted that it could fill the needs of my old ICE truck, and my daily commutes, and my frequent kids sports trips, and so on... When I talk to others in rural areas such as farmers, ranchers, and most blue-collar workers, an EV whether it is a car or truck is a joke to them. A rancher that I was speaking with made a great point that he uses his diesel pickup to haul large gooseneck trailers to move cattle and haul huge bales of hay. Telling him that he will no longer be able to purchase a useable truck in 2035, especially when there currently is no viable alternative, just doesn't make any sense. This is the disconnect.

I believe that another factor that EV mandates introduce is it feeds into the declining trust of government in general. I read an article last week that went into detail about how the public's trust in government to "do the right thing" has been slowly declining since the 1970's, but has accelerated since 2020. Currently trust in the federal government polled in the mid and low 30's percent (poll data: https://news.gallup.com/poll/512651/americans-trust-local-government-congress-least.aspx). With that low level of trust in government, any EV mandates or incentives will be fighting an uphill battle. The mandates have tried to be explained away by saying it's just increasing mileage and decreasing tailpipe emissions, but when the only way to meet those goals is through an EV, the trust gets even lower.

---
Edits for spelling & grammar and adding poll citation.

 

[broncoaz]

It should be considered that we are gaining more knowledge about the damage to the earth's environment done by burning oil. At least 66% of American's are concerned about climate change. We very well might not have 15 years to take decisive action.

Decisive action on the part of a single nation has a limited impact on global emissions. There was another thread recently where this was hashed out for a couple pages. My point there was that traditional first world nations have been reducing emissions over the past 20 years while China‘s and India’s emissions have been steadily increasing. China has overtaken the US as the number one emitter by a factor of three. They are still lower per capita than we are for now, but their emissions are increasing. At China’s current rate of emissions it won’t be long before the area under their graph exceeds the lifetime emissions of the US. Since the US/EU/Japan are doing well at reducing emissions while utilizing fossil fuels, I recommended we invest in helping developing countries (not China or India, think more Africa and South America) skip the dirtier parts of industrialization.

It looks like the Paris climate accords allocate carbon banks by population, meaning India and China have free license to pollute as much as they want for years to come while we trip over ourselves trying to reduce emissions. Global emissions matter, this approach is asinine.

https://www.climate.gov/news-featur...d-states-reduces-its-carbon-dioxide-emissions

 

[Cvh8601]

I think it’s worth pointing out that, aside from California, there is no “EV mandate”. There are simply goals and fuel economy requirements that are not likely to be able to be met by ICE cars with 30% thermal efficiency. The whole idea of a federal EV mandate is misinformation.

 

[MotoGary]

I think the Lightning story will be used for years to come as a case study by business schools on how not to market a product. The Lightning is an amazing vehicle that has been totally and utterly mis-marketed by Ford.

 

[broncoaz]

I think it’s worth pointing out that, aside from California, there is no “EV mandate”. There are simply goals and fuel economy requirements that are not likely to be able to be met by ICE cars with 30% thermal efficiency. The whole idea of a federal EV mandate is misinformation.

You are correct that it is not a federal EV mandate, I wasn’t explicitly clear in post 38 that it was a California issue like I stated in post 44. But there are 13 states and DC who follow CA laws, Massachusetts where I live is one of those. It’ll be interesting to see how things play out in the courts as we get closer to the implementation date. I think there is an argument that CA’s stricter rules impact interstate commerce since they have a specific exemption but other states are choosing to get on board.

https://nccleantech.ncsu.edu/2024/0...king-californias-zero-emission-vehicle-rules/

Why is the ACC program important?

The ACC program provides a gateway for states, in addition to California, to adopt vehicle emissions regulations that are more stringent than those set by the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). To make a long story short, California is the only state in the nation that is permitted to adopt its own emissions standards regulations for vehicles. The CAA grants specific authority to California, allowing the state to set its own separate and stricter-than-federal vehicle emissions regulations. Unlike California, under the CAA, other states are not allowed to create their own standards. However under Section 177, other states are allowed to adopt California’s motor vehicle emissions standards, thus allowing the adoption of more stringent rules.

 

[21st Century Truck]

I think it’s worth pointing out that, aside from California, there is no “EV mandate”. There are simply goals and fuel economy requirements that are not likely to be able to be met by ICE cars with 30% thermal efficiency. The whole idea of a federal EV mandate is misinformation.

Yes, thank You. The term "mandate" can be easily misunderstood because it has far broader inferential meanings in casual conversation and a far narrower, precise meaning in, for example, legal documents, i.e. legislation.

There are multiple other such words whose meaning changes in scope or in application, when used colloquially or professionally. I can think of the journalistic common use of "clandestine" and "covert" as interchangeable terms, as an example, whereas in professional conversation and also in legal directives (as in "specified in legislative acts") where these two words are applied very differently from each other. I'm sure others here can cite engineering and other terms whose meaning changes when used professionally and when used in a casual conversation.

I know as a former Californian that there do exist state mandates. I also note that such a mandate might have one type of reaction among the citizens of that state, and have a far different reaction among citizens of a different state far away. Most legislation, afaik, is produced and implemented at state levels in the U.S.

 

[XENOILPHOBE]

I agree you are correct with respect to intentional misinformation and lobbyists, unfortunately it’s working and the fear is reinforced by calls for banning new ICE cars from being sold at some arbitrary date in the future. Basically everyone wants clean air and water, but they also fear what they don’t know. Why would they want to be stripped of their choice of an ICE vehicle that they know and understand when all they think they know is that EV’s are expensive, don’t go that far, don’t work well in cold, will leave them stranded, can be controlled by gov’t to take away their freedoms, etc. It seems like simple physiology, people need to come to the decision that EV’s are for them without being forced by the hand of government. Politicians need to drop the idea of banning new ICE vehicles at some future date and let the market forces dictate the pace of change. Incentivize improving the charging network, standardize the charging network, and incentivize companies to develop better batteries and build them here in the US. The cars and trucks are basically good enough as is, generally far exceeding the performance and capability of ICE

Add in the vilification of Musk (synonymous with EV’s) by the side that supports EV’s because of politics and people who might consider arguably the best entry level EV (Model 3 or Y) are walking away to a worse EV experience with a different brand or just sticking with ICE. I had a conversation with a woman in Provincetown, Ma a couple months ago at a professional networking event. We were talking about solar and EV’s, she said she would like to transition but the Audi EV she wanted was too expensive. I suggested that I really liked my Y and it was far more affordable than the Audi. I even offered to let her take mine for a spin. Her attitude completely changed, she said that she could never support Elon and that he was scum. I suggested she should buy the best car for the money, not the CEO. She ended the conversation.

We’re left with one side’s distaste for EV’s based on fear and the other side shying away from them over contempt of one man’s politics. Yes, we are stupid.

 

[Heliian]

People are cheap, stupid and don't like change.

Mostly because people aren't spending big bucks on vehicles regardless of drivetrain. Dodge rams don't sell because they're reliable or well built, they sell because it's the cheapest option for a truck.

So many people were on the fence because of tax credits and other discounts for the lightning not making it cheap enough.

Range and other factors at the bottom. Range isn't an issue for the majority of drivers, it's a good excuse but it's not reality. More range would be better but even if you got 1000 miles out of the 131kwh battery there would still be plenty of other excuses and it all circles back to COST.

When I bought the lightning, I crunched the numbers compared to my old gas Lariat. I was able to see a return in 4-5 years for my situation. If you're coming from a 3 door f150 to anything electric then you're not going to find value in it.

All they have to do is make them dirt cheap and sell a million.

 

[FloridaMan655321]

That guys ability to look like a thumb is impressive

 

[Grumpy2]

this approach is asinine.

I am not ready to compare the USA efforts to stop the climate crisis to China or India. This is real, the experts agree, and it is going to be BAD.

We have been the largest oil producer for the past 6 years, plus:

2020–2021: U.S. coal exports to China increased 616% from 2020 to 2021, from roughly 1.8 million tons to 12.8 million tons

We are selling our resources for a short term gain for a few thousand people's bank account. Can we do it alone, no. But we must try, and we have the ability to pick the low hanging fruit. We like to think we are a great nation that can LEAD not follow. We can easily greatly reduce CO2 from personal vehicles. This is a battle we must win, and not hide behind others.

Those who were born after 1980 you could very well have grandchildren who will be 40 years old in 2100. Watch this video to see what we are talking about that could happen in 2100. The video was made using a Ford Lightning by the way:




You won't see this on FOX or hear it from Washington, but it is real, it is not BS, and it is coming, if we change voluntarily fine, if we don't we must have mandated changes or we will lose this war .... WE MUST STOP BURNING OIL.

And by the way, China is leading in solar and battery technology.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

When I bought the lightning, I crunched the numbers compared to my old gas Lariat. I was able to see a return in 4-5 years for my situation.

My calculations show that for a similarly-equipped F-150 ICE Lariat, purchasing a Lightning over the ICE will pay me back within 2-3 years. Maybe even sooner since my assumption was 10,000-14,000 miles per year and I'm on track to put 15,000 to 20,000 miles a year.

 

[broncoaz]

I know as a former Californian that there do exist state mandates. I also note that such a mandate might have one type of reaction among the citizens of that state, and have a far different reaction among citizens of a different state far away. Most legislation, afaik, is produced and implemented at state levels in the U.S.

In the post above this one I detail how California’s policy impacts 13 other states.

I am not ready to compare the USA efforts to stop the climate crisis to China or India. This is real, the experts agree, and it is going to be BAD.

We have been the largest oil producer for the past 6 years, plus:

2020–2021: U.S. coal exports to China increased 616% from 2020 to 2021, from roughly 1.8 million tons to 12.8 million tons

We are selling our resources for a short term gain for a few thousand people's bank account. Can we do it alone, no. But we must try, and we have the ability to pick the low hanging fruit. We like to think we are a great nation that can LEAD not follow. We can easily greatly reduce CO2 from personal vehicles. This is a battle we must win, and not hide behind others.

Those who were born after 1980 you could very well have grandchildren who will be 40 years old in 2100. Watch this video to see what we are talking about that could happen in 2100. The video was made using a Ford Lightning by the way:




You won't see this on FOX or hear it from Washington, but it is real, it is not BS, and it is coming, if we change voluntarily fine, if we don't we must have mandated changes or we will lose this war .... WE MUST STOP BURNING OIL.

And by the way, China is leading in solar and battery technology.

I’m not arguing that climate change isn’t happening. Sure the emissions in the US are a problem, but we won’t solve the problem ourselves no matter what we do. Many people have an issue with impacting our economy while our competitors don’t have to take similar actions. 66% of people may answer a survey that they are concerned about the climate crisis, but when it starts to impact their wallet and daily life they won’t be as vigilant.

As for coal exports to China in 2020-2021, China was commissioning record numbers of coal plants. They approved and built even more coal plants in 2022 and again in 2023. Commodities markets are global in nature, as their US limits our coal consumption that capacity is still produced and sold to whoever is buying. Same thing could be said for the dirty tar sands crude coming out of Canada, even though we killed the Keystone XL pipeline the product is still being extracted and sold. I see a difference in fossil fuels being consumed in the US where we have stricter emissions laws vs being consumed in countries without similar restrictions. The fossil fuel industry is large and powerful, they won’t just stop producing and exporting without a fight.

Interesting article from Reuters about China’s new coal plants and approvals for expansion.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/china-2023-coal-power-approvals-rose-putting-climate-targets-risk-2024-02-22/#:~:text=China has approved 218 GW,in 2022, the analysis said.

Saying that China is leading in solar and battery technology is deceptive. China is leading in producing those technologies under the direction of western companies who developed the technologies or with stolen intellectual properties from other nations. If we weren’t outsourcing our production of green energy to China they would be in the game. Unfortunately we have focused on those short term profits rather than the long term benefit for our nation.

Guidance from the FBI on IP theft.
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/china-exec-summary-risk-to-corporate-america-2019.pdf

 

[Cvh8601]

Yes, thank You. The term "mandate" can be easily misunderstood because it has far broader inferential meanings in casual conversation and a far narrower, precise meaning in, for example, legal documents, i.e. legislation.

Fair point, and totally agree - words matter. ’There is no mandate’ isn’t quite fair as has been pointed out because it’s maybe splitting hairs given the various state regulations in play. However I’d still argue that since the state rules phase in over the next decade functionally means there is no colloquial EV mandate / requirement to buy an EV vs. not an EV today, but instead a fear of possibly having such a mandate / requirement (in fewer than half of states) a decade from now.

Even if these rules stay in place without modification, we’ll probably end up with “27 state” cars and 50 state cars instead of 49 state cars and 50 state cars like exist today. And of course the extra emissions from the 27 states not on board with EVs will just stay in those states

 

[Jesse-Infotainment]

It will take time. I was never anti EV. We were limited to our situation. We were renting. Installing a EVSE was going to be tough. The expense not worth it on a home we may be leaving in a year. If you cant charge at home I wont say the swap isnt worth it.. but it complicates things and the cost isnt as beneficial. The other aspect is the home you are currently buying or own may not be an easy install for an EVSE. Not everyone has 2-5 grand to throw on top of a car purchase to upgrade a panel. I think Fords power Promise is a GREAT idea to get people willing to take a look at an EV. QMerit and their subs need to do a good job of taking care of people on the install and being fair and right with people if they arent that alone can make a person swear off an EV.

People will need to have the conversation with people they trust. The conversation starts when one of your coworkers or acquaintances notices you have an EV and starts to dig for info. They will also watch your experience and make sure in a year you havent thrown in the towel. That is a big one they are pushing right now, that a majority of EV owners regret their purchase. Time and real conversations will be the only thing that can change minds. There is a very strong effort right now to convince people the EV is not the future of transportation. Most people could very easily live with an EV if they tried. I feel the price will also be a hold back. Lighting Flash I got was more money that a ICE lariat. People look at the immediate cost not the long term. I looked at the full savings and it was clear that is why my wife and I both went EV.

I had written this prior to the mandates being brought up. I agree. I think the EV mandates hurt more than help. People do not like to be forced into things. I am well aware that we arent forced but when people hear mandate they feel its forced. Without even knowing the details. People want to buy of their own free will. So any time they feel they are being told what to buy it turns them off. I cant tell you how many people have hit me with the "They cant force me to get a damned EV" and the naysayers will take full advantage of anything they can to cause a hesitation.

Time and real conversations will be the only solution.

Sponsored