Forum Discussion
I agree govt mandates only distort the market and lead to bad business choices. I still can't believe they aren't pushing 100-150 mile range commuter cars (maybe 1 or 2 seaters) for $15k focused on multi-car families. At a cheap price, sold for a purpose, I think they would sell well. When they try to get 300-400mile range carrying 5+ passengers, things quickly spiral and really hold up the development.
Honestly, for pickups, I think they tried to get too fancy. Instead of building everything new from the ground up:
- Rip out the 500lb V8, 200lb gas tank and 200lb transmission. Otherwise, leave the truck unchanged.
- Mate a single 200lb electric motor to the drive shaft with a higher torque motor and skip the transmission. Install 700lb of batteries (~70kwh) for a base model (no weight change to the truck). Use the 2500lb payload f150 and double the battery bank (leaving 1800lb useable payload) for 140kwh (a bit more than the extended range F150 EV). Design, tooling and manufacturing costs would be drastically cheaper as 80% of the truck is stock ICE truck. If you make the batteries modular (mounted between the frame rails), you could even offer a 210kwh option (similar to the GMC) though they might have to beef up the suspension as that would start to eat into the payload too much.
- Might be looking at around $8k upcharge for the batteries (offset by the cost of the V8 & transmission) but now it's close enough that fuel savings could justify the cost increase.
- Except for the electric motor & controller, everything is stock, so any mechanic familiar with an F150 can work on the suspension and other components.
For RVs, of course, cost needs to come down but the Ford EV is comparable cost to it's ICE 1/2 tons. The issue is it's only about 60% of the range of the GM EV 1/2 ton and not practical for towing.
Nice thought but you missed a huge chunk of the technology that makes EVs as viable as they are. I’d say actually missed most of it.
An electric motor and a big f…ing battery is easy. Like you said. But wholly more inefficient without the technology controlling it and regenerative braking and the computer telling you where the next charger station is, etc.
Oversimplification doesn’t work in this instance.
- valhalla360Jun 08, 2025Navigator
Actually, it is that simple.
For the longest time, it was battery cost/weight.
- 20yr ago, you were looking at 3 tons of lead acid batteries which became self defeating or $50k to build a lithium pack (back when you could buy a car for $15-25k).
- Now, lithium has come down thru economy of scale to less than 1/10th the price.
Electric motor controllers are nothing new. Golf carts, fork lifts, etc... have been using them for decades. Just need to be scaled to automotive use case. Regenerative braking is basically reversing an electric motor so it acts as a generator. It's sort of like engine braking but turns it back into electricity...easily done mounted to the drive shaft or rear axle.
Charging stations are largely a matter of time. If you want to build a truck stop for EV semis, that's a challenge because you will have hundreds per day coming in wanting 1000-2000kwh in 15 min. Most cars/light trucks will charge at home 95% of the time and only occasionally needing a fast charge of 50-100kwh. The issue is getting the network spread wide enough that there is one convienent when you need a top up. But you can put in a couple medium speed charging stations pretty much anywhere that has a grid connection. If you have decent grid connection, you can put in a few high speed chargers.
Now, I have no expectation that we will see 90% EVs in the next decade but once the govt gets out of the way and lets the market decide how to implement it, I do expect we will see them expand in market share.