Would you give up your Frunk for more range?

[Scorpio3d]

I was watching the video by @Cbowe and it got me to thinking about having the Frunk versus an ICE vehicle that has an engine.
Just curious if people would be willing to give up the Frunk for an extra battery pack that would give you more range?

Sponsored

 

[TaxmanHog]

I really enjoy the utility of the Frunk, I'd pass on the optional battery pack in there.

 

[rdr854]

NEVER!!!!

 

[Grumpy2]

I think we will be giving up on the HUGE frunk for more range and better aero, which I think is the logical approach. The blunt front is always impacting range during every mile we drive; but the HUGE frunk is rarely entirely full. I don't want to give up on a large frunk, but it doesn't have to be as big as it is if I can get a significant increase in range, say 15% with the same battery??

 

[HOTAS]

No thanks, I’ll keep my frunk.
ER Range is fine and the frunk is what makes this truck more versatile than a SUV, and the best truck on the road !

 

[broncoaz]

No. One of the reasons I chose the Lighting over the Cybertruck or Silverado was the larger accessible frunk. The Rivian wasn’t even a consideration because of the high lift over frunk. I agree the frunk will be sacrificed for aero considerations in the redesign.

 

[Mach Turtle]

As a very rough guess, I think it might be possible to get about 5-10% more range if the square traditional hood/frunk were replaced with something sloping down from the windshield to about the top of the bumper, and the headlights and fenders were adjusted to fit. This estimate is not based on any calculations or CFD, just a really rough guess.

The front end would look (dare I say?) a bit Tesla-like, perhaps as if a Lightning and a Tesla fell deeply in love and something unnatural took its course... also, modifications to the back end, in particular an aero cap, would probably make more difference while eating up space over the bed.

We'd lose about 50% of the frunk volume and perhaps 75% of our dignity.

For a few people, it would probably be worth it. Not for me, I think. I'm planning to charge my SR a little more often, probably add a couple more solar panels to the house (this truck does get hungry), enjoy that big frunk, and see what T^3 and others become in the next few years.

A reference for the loss of dignity problem is in another thread here with a typically concerning image being:

An aerodynamics reference with some analysis (which has probably been linked on this forum before) is here.

 

[carys98]

Absolutely not!

 

[Grease Lightning]

He’ll to the no!!

My frunk is always full of my camping gear and my charger, so I can get off work and explore the world if that is my desires.

The range is fine. I would support a slightly hire charging curve to make sure we can do 15-85% in 25-30 minutes everyday.

 

[Firn]

Nope, I love my frunk.

Although I don't use it much, I still use it more than the max range of the truck.

I do wish Ford had done a "Charger-Like" design on the front though. Flow through grill with hood vents would be great, especially considering the factory grill is fairly, meh...

 

[Rocket808]

Nope.

 

[Jseis]

No. And then there’s the added weight And high weight which messes with handling dynamics.

 

[XENOILPHOBE]

Frick No. I use that FRUNK everyday. Plus I love seeing the sheeple freak out when I open the front of truck and drop my groceries in there...

 

[Jseis]

My homies thinking a frunk is better than the cave.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I'd rather they redesign the battery to be an 800V battery during charging with the same kWh so DCFC is slightly faster whenever possible. But I think my partner would have no hesitation to give up the frunk for 100 miles more range.

Sponsored