F150 Lightning Road Trip & Ike Gauntlet Pull

[FishOnOne]

TFL drove the new F150 Lightning from Michigan to Colorado

Test Configuration: Mostly highway miles at 70-75 mph
Total Miles: 1225
Total Charging Time: ~ 5 hours

Summary: (Fail) Efficiency at highway speeds and charging time

Previous Test was the Rivian towing a small trailer up the Ike and the summary was an Epic Fail

Spoiler Alert: Pretty sure the towing test with the Lightning will fall into the Epic Fail category.

Link

[valhalla360]

time2roll wrote:

rjstractor wrote:

Thermoguy wrote:
Semi trucks with EV can outperform a comparable ICE

Depends on your definition of "outperform". Compared with a conventional semi, the Freightliner eCascadia very likely accelerates faster. It may or may not climb hills faster- Freightliner's website lists HP options from 300 to 525. So probably a wash on hill climbing speeds. Tesla's website for their prototype Semi lists its speed on a 5% grade at 60 mph, which is good but not overwhelmingly so. Higher HP ICE trucks are close to that. But when it comes to doing what semi trucks actually are designed to do- move the freight hundreds of miles efficiently and productively, the electric trucks aren't close yet in performance. I say 'yet', because they will be some day. I hope you're right on the sodium ion batteries, because I don't see lithium as being sustainable once EV production expands a hundred fold.

For a commercial truck "performance" is often measured in cost per mile.

Nope.

If you produce a truck that gets $0.01/mile but it only can go 2 miles per day, trucking companies won't care to look at your truck.

A low cost per mile is only good if they can keep the miles per day high. Sitting at a truck stop waiting for batteries to charge is not making miles.

[way2roll]

time2roll wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Depends on the yardstick. TFL called it a fail. Yet people can't get enough of them. Where is the middle on this?

If the Lightning is truly a fail it will not last long.

I don't think it's a fail at all and it's surprising that's their take on it. It's a success in my book. But it's not better. It's different with it's own set of challenges.

The demand doesn't surprise me either. For what most people use their ICE F-150's for (short range grocery getters with the occasional haul or pulling a boat to the local ramp) it makes complete sense.

[wanderingaimles]

time2roll wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Depends on the yardstick. TFL called it a fail. Yet people can't get enough of them. Where is the middle on this?

If the Lightning is truly a fail it will not last long.

Not being snarky, real question's.
What percentage of pickups sold in America are just grocery getters? What percentage are used for towing or hauling less than once a month?

Success for the vehicle could be high even if the vehicle is nothing but a Tesla with a bed.

[time2roll]

FishOnOne wrote:
The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Depends on the yardstick. TFL called it a fail. Yet people can't get enough of them. Where is the middle on this?

If the Lightning is truly a fail it will not last long.

[FishOnOne]

Lantley wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Lantley wrote:
I wonder if there were this many naysayers unwilling to give up there horse when the model T was introduced?
Remember there were not many paved roads or even construction equipment to build them.
Somehow we managed to build roads, gas stations, and an auto industry.
We even took it a step further and built the airplane
It won't be next week but I think we'll find a way to develop a battery and charging solutions over the next 20 years or so.
Color TV,cell phones,computers and the internet have all been introduced since I was born and have dramatically changed the way we live and think.
To think we cannot develop battery technology is silly.

The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Do you believe EV is not a step forward?

For towing and long distance traveling like TFL's test - Call it 3 steps forwards and two steps back.

[way2roll]

Lantley wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Lantley wrote:

The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Do you believe EV is not a step forward?

Nope. Given the true net on emissions gains (or lack thereof) from cradle to grave - not at the tailpipe , continued dependence on conventional energy, the ecological impacts of mining raw materials, the finite supply of raw materials, dependency on foreign nations for raw materials, questionable labor practices from those foreign nations, hazardous waste disposal during manufacturing as well as end of life for batteries, cost to replace batteries mid life cycle, and all the constraints and logistics of charging. No, they aren't better. It's trading one set of problems for another.

[Grit_dog]

Lantley wrote:

Do you believe EV is not a step forward?

It's all context, man.
Being we are all in the "Tow Vehicle" section of a RV Forum, the new (and yet to be released) electric trucks are not even close to a step forward as tow rigs.
I mean, if there was a brand new EDuramax Dually, with (well EVs have so much power, that part would be easy) enough battery cap to tow your 5ver 100 miles (which would be like 300-400% more battery cap than the current Etrucks) for a mere $200k ($90-150k is the going rate for little trucks, so...), would you have one in your driveway tomorrow? And answer that honestly.

And in general, the only reason EV's ARE a step forward in some uses are because the power industry and subsidiaries (think fuel stations) aren't seeing enough of a demand to charge more for the supply.

Name one thing besides maybe Ramen noodles that a For Profit mfg or industry has said, "Dang the demand is huge for this thing that is a good deal for the consumer. We shall keep charging the absolute minimum we possibly can to stay in business to benefit our beloved consumers!"

There is a market. That market share will grow. And it may/will take over ICE vehicles completely at some point. And the overall "cost" WILL be the new norm, whatever it is. Just don't be blinded by the shiny objects in the mean time. As they aren't completely shiny when you consider the whole package.

[Lantley]

FishOnOne wrote:

Lantley wrote:
I wonder if there were this many naysayers unwilling to give up there horse when the model T was introduced?
Remember there were not many paved roads or even construction equipment to build them.
Somehow we managed to build roads, gas stations, and an auto industry.
We even took it a step further and built the airplane
It won't be next week but I think we'll find a way to develop a battery and charging solutions over the next 20 years or so.
Color TV,cell phones,computers and the internet have all been introduced since I was born and have dramatically changed the way we live and think.
To think we cannot develop battery technology is silly.

The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

Do you believe EV is not a step forward?

[wanderingaimles]

That EV claim of lower maintenance cost is somewhat misleading also.
Due to the increased weight of an Ev, tires are much more expensive, and have to be replaced much more often, from what I've read, a type S can cost upwards of $1500 for a tire change, and they are recommended every 26k miles. Not 50-60k like a standard set for a midsized car.
Also, figure in battery change after 5 to 7 years, and maintenance gets turned upside down. And trucks/tow vehicles especially do get used past that 5-7 year window.

[Grit_dog]

On a different, but totally related note, I get the EV thing. He!!, if I won the lottery I'd have a Model S Plaid sitting next to my fleet of Hellcats and Demons!
But if the point is to be economical, how is a $130k to $150k Rivian even remotely a consideration?
Lets face it, there's utility of EVs (which is still largely debatable) and there's status symbol of EVs which is VERY apparent.
Heck, even a crew cab Lightning is a $90k pickup truck and a half ton at that.
Do the math, kids. This isn't about being green or economical...

When you could buy a top of the line ICE 1/2 ton from any mfg, with the power to tow more than any self respecting rvnet weight cop would even consider towing AND put 200,000 miles worth of $5 gas in it before even coming close to breaking even.
Like t2r said. Cost per mile is what counts...unless you're after the status symbol portion of it....then at least the Ford Lightning doesn't require the owner to wear a paper bag over their head so as to not be embarrassed to be driving comparable ugliness to a Pontiac Aztec or AMC Pacer!!

[time2roll]

rjstractor wrote:

Thermoguy wrote:
Semi trucks with EV can outperform a comparable ICE

Depends on your definition of "outperform". Compared with a conventional semi, the Freightliner eCascadia very likely accelerates faster. It may or may not climb hills faster- Freightliner's website lists HP options from 300 to 525. So probably a wash on hill climbing speeds. Tesla's website for their prototype Semi lists its speed on a 5% grade at 60 mph, which is good but not overwhelmingly so. Higher HP ICE trucks are close to that. But when it comes to doing what semi trucks actually are designed to do- move the freight hundreds of miles efficiently and productively, the electric trucks aren't close yet in performance. I say 'yet', because they will be some day. I hope you're right on the sodium ion batteries, because I don't see lithium as being sustainable once EV production expands a hundred fold.

For a commercial truck "performance" is often measured in cost per mile.

[fj12ryder]

Absolutely no one is denying that electrically driven RV's are coming, the problem is the fan boys all think it will happen tomorrow, while the naysayers are pointing out many real problems that will delay things a decade or two...or three. The infrastructure, and battery storage of electricity have to catch up, and that will not happen immediately.

Who knows, EV's may be superseded before they actually reach maturity. After all EV technology is well over a hundred years old, and some new technology may supplant it.

[FishOnOne]

Lantley wrote:
I wonder if there were this many naysayers unwilling to give up there horse when the model T was introduced?
Remember there were not many paved roads or even construction equipment to build them.
Somehow we managed to build roads, gas stations, and an auto industry.
We even took it a step further and built the airplane
It won't be next week but I think we'll find a way to develop a battery and charging solutions over the next 20 years or so.
Color TV,cell phones,computers and the internet have all been introduced since I was born and have dramatically changed the way we live and think.
To think we cannot develop battery technology is silly.

The thing is as new successful technology was developed, it was typically better than what it was replacing.

[Lantley]

I wonder if there were this many naysayers unwilling to give up there horse when the model T was introduced?
Remember there were not many paved roads or even construction equipment to build them.
Somehow we managed to build roads, gas stations, and an auto industry.
We even took it a step further and built the airplane
It won't be next week but I think we'll find a way to develop a battery and charging solutions over the next 20 years or so.
Color TV,cell phones,computers and the internet have all been introduced since I was born and have dramatically changed the way we live and think.
To think we cannot develop battery technology is silly.

[FishOnOne]

Thermoguy wrote:


Finally, a point on batteries - soon batteries will be Sodium Ion - salt, not Lithium - better for the environment and more plentiful.

Then the battery manufacturers better get into high gear to implement these batteries because what they have to offer now still have some roadblocks to address.