Wife has an R1S on order and I have a Maverick on order (I doubt either will get here by next summer). But she's been looking at the Lightning and figured the new price even with a Lariat trim gets her further ahead than an R1S. I would gladly consolidate my Maverick and her R1S if that means we could get a Lightning lol.
We drove 3200 miles on a round trip a few weeks ago. We stopped for an hour every 3 or 4 hours in the Expedition. And found a hotel after 12hrs of driving. Also, I'm leaving the 5 sided building in September so my commute will cut in half but my wife will still be commuting there. Maybe its our age but EVs are getting more and more justifiable
In reply to Keith Tanner :
also the F 150 misses out on $42,500 rear enders that can happen to Rivians. Sorry but I read the article about it a few weeks ago and don't have a proper citation.
dyintorace said:
Tom Suddard said:
In your example, it looks like you pay a flat fee of $16.50 each month. Then, for the first 850 kWh, you pay $.0821/kWh plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. For every kWh after the first 850, you pay $.1088 plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. You then pay those two taxes on the other fees.
To determine the cost per trip, I'd subtract the $16.50 as your house is going to be connected to the grid no matter how much you drive, then average your usage of each tier and add taxes to find an average cost per kWh. Multiply that by the number of kWh used on the trip to get an idea of how much energy you used.
That makes sense. Thanks! Given that we've always hit the 2nd tier, even before buying the EV, would it be fair to only use the higher tier pricing when making the calculation? Every kWh we use for the car will come from that pool.
You may not currently hit it-But there is a third tier that some of us more wasteful Gainesvillians hit most months. 
MrJoshua said:
dyintorace said:
Tom Suddard said:
In your example, it looks like you pay a flat fee of $16.50 each month. Then, for the first 850 kWh, you pay $.0821/kWh plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. For every kWh after the first 850, you pay $.1088 plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. You then pay those two taxes on the other fees.
To determine the cost per trip, I'd subtract the $16.50 as your house is going to be connected to the grid no matter how much you drive, then average your usage of each tier and add taxes to find an average cost per kWh. Multiply that by the number of kWh used on the trip to get an idea of how much energy you used.
That makes sense. Thanks! Given that we've always hit the 2nd tier, even before buying the EV, would it be fair to only use the higher tier pricing when making the calculation? Every kWh we use for the car will come from that pool.
You may not currently hit it-But there is a third tier that some of us more wasteful Gainesvillians hit most months.
Seriously?? I didn't know a 3rd tier existed! :o
Rons said:
In reply to Keith Tanner :
also the F 150 misses out on $42,500 rear enders that can happen to Rivians. Sorry but I read the article about it a few weeks ago and don't have a proper citation.
Yeah, that's one reason I went with the F-150 vs. the Rivian. I have some issues with that story--when I was fixing wrecks I saw all sorts of interesting approaches to move the numbers up or down for various reasons--but the bottom line is I plan to keep my truck for a long time, and I'm more confident I'll be able to find parts for the Ford than for the Rivian. Imagine trying to find an R1T in the junkyard in 10 years when the sun visor breaks or whatever--F150 parts should be plentiful.
Another (very small) update. When you buy a new Ford, they give you a pile of points you can use to purchase accessories (at ridiculous dealer markups, of course). For $200 worth of points, I got a windshield sun shade and a four-pack of tie-down points that clip into the brackets on the bed:
Huh, I take tie-down loops in the bed for granted. Never occurred to me they wouldn't be in the F150. I wonder if that's partly due to the aluminum bed?
In reply to Keith Tanner :
It already had four of them at the corners, so these bring the total to eight.
In reply to Tom Suddard :
Ah, that makes more sense. Are there other cool things that can use those brackets? Like a slot for 2x4s so you can build a full-width platform above the wheel wells? Might make for a good camping option :)
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I was so excited to find cool stuff that fit the brackets, but Ford has basically nothing that I could find, and the aftermarket doesn't seem to have much, either. E-track brackets fit in them sort of, but not perfectly. I'm shocked there weren't 20 different accessories for the plates. Ford does make a sweet set of motorcycle ramps that attach to them, but they won't fit my truck (I think the tailgate step blocks where they attach) and they're also like $1000.
Maybe if I ever get some free time I'll fire up the machine tools and build some stuff. For now, they're just overcomplicated tie-down hooks.
Oh, and another note on tie-down points: It also has real steel tie-down points in the frunk and in the back seat area. Little stuff like that is what happens when you know your target audience really, really well.
It's moving day! (For our friends). Proof EVs can do truck stuff:
The Lightning had a busy weekend, so it's time for an update.
On Friday, I towed the Miata over to the FIRM for a test day, and was again blown away by how much more relaxing it is to tow with a new truck than with one that's 20 years old. I know that's not a huge surprise, but it's so nice riding around in a silent, easy to drive truck after a day in the sun. I pulled into the track with 62% battery remaining/101 miles of range indicated on the dash.
While there, I plugged into their Tesla charger for free for a few hours, and I finally tried out the ProPower (120V outlets in the bed) to run a big fan all day. I arrived back home with somewhere around a 40% full battery. Success!
I charged the truck back up at home overnight, then left on Saturday for another adventure: A trip across the state! I drove over to Brooksville and back, a 264 mile round trip with lots of highway involved. And... it was a non-issue. I left with full battery and arrived at home with just under 20% remaining. Did I mention how relaxing it is riding around in a silent living room that drives itself?
On Sunday, I squeezed six people into the truck, proving it's the ultimate family vehicle, too. Overall, succcess! Current mileage is just about 9500.
dyintorace said:
Tom Suddard said:
In your example, it looks like you pay a flat fee of $16.50 each month. Then, for the first 850 kWh, you pay $.0821/kWh plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. For every kWh after the first 850, you pay $.1088 plus a $.0500/kWh fuel surcharge. You then pay those two taxes on the other fees.
To determine the cost per trip, I'd subtract the $16.50 as your house is going to be connected to the grid no matter how much you drive, then average your usage of each tier and add taxes to find an average cost per kWh. Multiply that by the number of kWh used on the trip to get an idea of how much energy you used.
That makes sense. Thanks! Given that we've always hit the 2nd tier, even before buying the EV, would it be fair to only use the higher tier pricing when making the calculation? Every kWh we use for the car will come from that pool.
Does your state offer support for solar panels? If so you might look into it. And even if you have a older estimate the prices for new panels are down significantly.
In reply to Tom Suddard :
Ford definitely got it right with the front trunk lid opening all the way to the floor. Perfect for loading in a toolbox and still having the drawers accessible like you've shown. The Rivian only opens the hood, so you have to lift over the grill and reach down into the front trunk. Much less convenient.
wae
PowerDork
8/1/23 11:31 a.m.
Tom Suddard said:
Rons said:
In reply to Keith Tanner :
also the F 150 misses out on $42,500 rear enders that can happen to Rivians. Sorry but I read the article about it a few weeks ago and don't have a proper citation.
Yeah, that's one reason I went with the F-150 vs. the Rivian. I have some issues with that story--when I was fixing wrecks I saw all sorts of interesting approaches to move the numbers up or down for various reasons--but the bottom line is I plan to keep my truck for a long time, and I'm more confident I'll be able to find parts for the Ford than for the Rivian. Imagine trying to find an R1T in the junkyard in 10 years when the sun visor breaks or whatever--F150 parts should be plentiful.
Do you have a feel for how much "regular" F-150 is in the Lightning? Do they use the same body panels, interior, suspension/chassis, and all that like the liquid-fueled F-150?
maschinenbau said:
In reply to Tom Suddard :
Ford definitely got it right with the front trunk lid opening all the way to the floor. Perfect for loading in a toolbox and still having the drawers accessible like you've shown. The Rivian only opens the hood, so you have to lift over the grill and reach down into the front trunk. Much less convenient.
100%, and a not-insignificant reason for choosing this over the Rivian.
In reply to wae :
There's tons of "regular" F-150 here. Same body panels for the most part, same cab/interior, tons of recycled suspension parts, etc. There is one significant change, though: The Lightning has IRS instead of a stick axle, so all of that is bespoke. It has the largest aluminum trailing arms I've ever seen!
Ford got to the 99 yard line and fumbled the ball.
Why not use all the exterior panels and head/tail lights from a regular F150? Especially tailgates. That lowers cost, complexity, confusion, and adds to the overall longevity of the vehicle.
Or am I totally missing the mark and the focus groups said that they are only buying a Lightning to get the lightbars across the grill and tailgate?
onemanarmy said:
Ford got to the 99 yard line and fumbled the ball.
Why not use all the exterior panels and head/tail lights from a regular F150? Especially tailgates. That lowers cost, complexity, confusion, and adds to the overall longevity of the vehicle.
Or am I totally missing the mark and the focus groups said that they are only buying a Lightning to get the lightbars across the grill and tailgate?
I agree with some of this, but not all. The hood/grille needed to be changed anyway, as there's no grille and the front needs to open to access the frunk. And my tailgate looks identical to a regular F-150.
I agree, the higher trims having a different tailgate is dumb, but that's one reason I didn't buy one.
Tom Suddard said:
onemanarmy said:
Ford got to the 99 yard line and fumbled the ball.
Why not use all the exterior panels and head/tail lights from a regular F150? Especially tailgates. That lowers cost, complexity, confusion, and adds to the overall longevity of the vehicle.
Or am I totally missing the mark and the focus groups said that they are only buying a Lightning to get the lightbars across the grill and tailgate?
I agree with some of this, but not all. The hood/grille needed to be changed anyway, as there's no grille and the front needs to open to access the frunk. And my tailgate looks identical to a regular F-150.
I agree, the higher trims having a different tailgate is dumb, but that's one reason I didn't buy one.
Interesting. Not all Lightnings have the tailgate lite bar?
The hood/grill 1 piece opening on the regular F150s is HUGE and opens all the way to the top of the front bumper. All that brain power at Ford could have figured out a way to make a frunk with existing infrastructure.
I like the Lightning, its just crazy to think that they were taking a gamble, risking BILLIONS and they took the time, had the meetings, had to design and source and test all these components unique to the Lightning when existing headlights and tailights, interior bits, tailgates and body panels could be used. They could have taken all that time, resources, and money and focused on longer range, reliability, durability, packaging, and/or just made it cheaper for the public....to further undercut all other EV truck offerings. Now they have thousands of new P/Ns, new suppliers, low volume/higher cost bits for what reason?
Love seeing the real world experiences though!
In reply to onemanarmy :
Ford changes the headlights and taillights (and sometimes f/r quarter panels) all the time on F150s. Start watching and you'll see all sorts of variations. I agree that most of it is change for the sake of change, but that's what you have to do to let the American media and consumers know that a new model year is out.
I have a friend who worked on the Lightning development. He was frustrated by how many F150 carryover parts they had to use - he feels they could have made it a better truck without those limitations. So your statements about how they spend their time changing parts needlessly don't quite line up with what the dev team felt.
Nice to see some in-depth real use.
The more I drive our Mach-E, the more I wish we really were allowed to tow significantly with it. As it is a European Job 1, it has a rating of 750 kg (that, supposedly, can be upgraded to 1000 kg). I have used for a small trailer and it is great and this summer I had an "emergency" move of a camper trailer (1500 kg?) to the next block. It of course felt great.
That is why the KIA EV6 (GT?) looks like a possible Mach-E replacement. It tows 1800 kg (and has 585 bhp).
Keith Tanner said:
In reply to onemanarmy :
Ford changes the headlights and taillights (and sometimes f/r quarter panels) all the time on F150s. Start watching and you'll see all sorts of variations. I agree that most of it is change for the sake of change, but that's what you have to do to let the American media and consumers know that a new model year is out.
I have a friend who worked on the Lightning development. He was frustrated by how many F150 carryover parts they had to use - he feels they could have made it a better truck without those limitations. So your statements about how they spend their time changing parts needlessly don't quite line up with what the dev team felt.
I'd LOVE to have a sit down with a inside Ford team member and ask questions. What ROI/gain for the end user is there in a unique bespoke tailgate and headlights over using the current 2023 items? I was just reading an article this morning where Ford themselves are saying "EVs are too expensive" while they create new P/Ns and ALL that infrastructure to add unique items to EVs that don't add to range, dependability, or lower cost. I bet they had 10 meetings to decide on what the wheels and taillights should look like....then they had to hire super expensive designers to mock them up....then they had to find a supplier....then they had to hire a team to keep track of all the new parts....then they had to update all the catalogs and databases...then they had to build a seperate storage section and have a manager for that. Multiply that by 30 unique-to-Lightning items....many millions of dollars.
and exactly what carryover F150 parts made the Lightning worse.
While I agree with you for my use case--using it like a truck and making a purchase decision with a healthy dose of spreadsheet involved--I have a hunch that's not how most Americans buy/use trucks, especially not electric trucks.
I suspect Ford realized they'd be competing directly with Rivian, which has positioned themselves as a luxury brand from the start. I bet Ford made some styling/parts decisions, especially on the upper trims, knowing they'd be competing for market share with people that wouldn't traditionally buy an F-150 or ever think their car has too many bespoke parts.
