The F150 EV Lightning thread

In reply to Norma66-Brent :

its the blue version of fords lava? red.

Guy at the dragstrip a month or so ago told me that Ford had over 150,000 preorders for this truck.  Wonder what it is now.

I'm sure demand is even higher than bronco preorders. Gonna be interesting to see if they are still going to deliver on the timeline with all the supply chain issues. Fords lava red is a tri coat. This one is not. Which makes it much nicer to work with if paint work needs to be done.

There is a Lightning at SEMA. The frunk is huuuuuge. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Pics! I'm still interested in one

Gonna have to be someone else, I don't think I'm heading back in and I didn't take any pics of that. So I'll leave this here instead. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

That'll do. I have this car on my phone lol

Keith Tanner said:

Gonna have to be someone else, I don't think I'm heading back in and I didn't take any pics of that. So I'll leave this here instead. 

This has a FRUNK also correct? for mulch and bags of bird seed right?

I have the first and only allocation my dealer will be getting in 2022. Think I'm going to be passing this is out of control. 

Order a base pro with the upgrader changer and Ill buy it from you. 

I'd like to buy a F150EV except I'm 73
      Here's the kicker.  
      I accept the fact that at some point My driving days will be over.  With the self driving assists of the Tesla  that probably would add to my driving days?  I shouldn't have to explain to you that driving isn't just a pleasure, it's needed for independence.  
 Shopping, hair cuts, doctors dentists etc etc. 

  IF Ford offers those my ICE F150 becomes an EV 

In reply to frenchyd :

frenchyd said:

I accept the fact that at some point My driving days will be over.  With the self driving assists of the Tesla  that probably would add to my driving days?  I shouldn't have to explain to you that driving isn't just a pleasure, it's needed for independence.  

Realistically, no, they won't.  Tesla's "self driving" are really little more than fancy cruise control functions, it is not an autonomous vehicle and is not going to be one anytime soon.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

That's exactly what I'll be ( and elderly people all over the country ) needing sooner or later.   As I age My reactions will slow.  Brakes that self apply before I can react? That will be helpful. Lane keeping aide, that will give me some additional years of independence. Blind spot warnings? Again  a safety factor to allow the elderly independence. 
   My grandfather got cataracts  in his late 70's  Nearly blind he still had to go shopping and to appointments etc.  My non driving grandmother slid over in the seat next to him and became his eyes. 
  Rural Wisconsin, when the roads were virtually empty it worked.  

In reply to frenchyd :

Things like emergency braking, fancy cruise control, Lane keeping assist are all widely available now, on EVs and ICEs alike. This stuff isn't Tesla exclusive.

frenchyd said:

That's exactly what I'll be ( and elderly people all over the country ) needing sooner or later.   As I age My reactions will slow.  Brakes that self apply before I can react? That will be helpful. Lane keeping aide, that will give me some additional years of independence. Blind spot warnings? Again  a safety factor to allow the elderly independence. 

These features improve safety for existing drivers, but they do not fundamentally change someone who can no longer drive safely into someone who can.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Independence means taking care of yourself ( and loved ones). 
     You do know what assisted living costs don't you?  My wife's mother is doing that and tax payers cough up $6000 a month for her.  That does not count doctors visits, dentist etc. ( which we provide). But a lot of seniors don't have that option. So again the tax payers pay for those.  
    The baby Boomers aren't all retired yet , and when they do can you imagine what that will cost the tax payers?  
So what is your solution?  
       I'm willing to lean on new technology to remain independent. Save the tax payers that $36,000 a year plus doctors visits etc. 

Granted at 73 I'm a better driver than many much younger drivers.  That's why I'm building a vintage Trans Am race car.  To keep my skills sharp.
     But at some point I accept modern safety features will keep me driving.  Hopefully I'll be like Paul Newman who was racing at LeMans in his 80's. But if not, I won't be a burden.  

frenchyd said:

So what is your solution?  

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that a truly autonomous car would be a great thing for many reasons, including the ones you mention.

What I'm saying is that those cars don't exist and IMHO cannot be built using the technologies that are being used today.  The problem is too complicated and has too many special cases, solving it requires a computer that can think like a human does.  "Machine learning" doesn't do that -- in fact, we don't even really know how PEOPLE think, and until we answer that question I don't see any way we're ever going to make a computer do it.

It took me a while, but I read the entire thread!  This truck fascinates me, and I'd love to have one.

Word from a construction professional...

I think it will have some real-world application challenges for construction professionals that make it less than a slam-dunk.  The primary one is jobsite recharging capability.  

I build commercial structures.  About 3/4 of my workforce travels a pretty long distance for work.  They are specialists.  They are gypsies.  They travel more than 2 hours each way to work and stay in hotels.  That means they will need to recharge at the jobsite (or the hotel).

Commercial jobsites are not just about building structures.  They also have to build their own infrastructure.  There are no utilities on site when we begin.  My last project went 14 months working on a temporary power service.  This service was only 40A.  (2)- 20A 110V circuits.  No 240V.  Negotiations with the power company took us 14 months before we could have anything more substantial.

The reality of charging at the site is that we would not have been able to make enough power available to charge an EV.  No less a fleet of them.  Are there genpacs, etc?  For road construction yes (but not usually near the parking area).  For commercial?  Almost never.

The ProPower is fantastic, but less useful in real life.  Commercial construction uses VERY LITTLE 110V power.  The vast majority of what we do is either battery cordless, gas powered, or truck based (like welding equipment).  For the few times we use extension cords, the ProPower would not serve us well.  We use 110V to charge scissor lifts (inside the building at night).  And occasionally for things like chop saws.  OSHA is now REALLY tight on us for power cords.  They will hit us with 6 figure fines for cords laying on the floor.  There is no way they would be ok with cords running across the floor, through a doorway, down a stair, across an unfinished parking lot, and plugged into a non GFCI outlet.  My company would absolutely restrict this to avoid a $100,000 fine.  The pictures of the truck pulled up to a new house under construction with a cord neatly hanging out of the frunk are really unrealistic.

The F-150 Lighting?  I love it.  Will I be buying one soon?  I wish I could, but nope.

But I will continue to read, and dream of one!

(or the hotel) is a legitimate option. More and more hotels are adding chargers to attract customers and sites like hotels.com will let you filter for hotels that offer this. I know there will always be reasons why this won't be possible and what if you're doing tornado relief etc, but that is a legit option.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

It's a POSSIBLE. 

Back to the pull-through charging problem... none of the hotels near where I am working have space for trucks to charge. And many of them require trailers to park a very long distance from their charging stations (and a lot of these guys tow trailers). 
 

I understand it's an option. That's why I wrote it. Real world says it's not quite as viable as it appears on paper. 

I have seen that new charger construction almost always includes at least one that is trailer compatible. But if you're one of the guys parking in the back of the lot or the dirt patch next door - yeah, that's a problem.

The math will work out differently for different aspects of construction. A handyman running around town might find this truck to be quite useful. A gravel pit that has trucks doing predictable work every day and returning to the home base every night, same. Gypsies running all over the country and working in unserved areas are the hardest nut to crack.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I'm just thinking of it in terms of quantity of workers. 
 

I've worked in many sectors.  Commercial is where I see the most workers. I frequently have 100 workers on a single site that's only 30,000 SF or so. 
 

Road construction is vast amounts of equipment with just a few operators. Residential work is usually small crews. Handyman work is usually as small as one man operators. Even industrial is usually not huge crews. 
 

I agree- different sectors will have different ability to use this well. I'm trying to think of the overall industry and it's relationship to truck buying. Commercial is the biggest percentage. 
 

I'm just saying that construction as an overall is not necessarily a slam-dunk. 

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

frenchyd said:

So what is your solution?  

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that a truly autonomous car would be a great thing for many reasons, including the ones you mention.

What I'm saying is that those cars don't exist and IMHO cannot be built using the technologies that are being used today.  The problem is too complicated and has too many special cases, solving it requires a computer that can think like a human does.  "Machine learning" doesn't do that -- in fact, we don't even really know how PEOPLE think, and until we answer that question I don't see any way we're ever going to make a computer do it.

Let's say that I'm OK  to drive up into my 80's.  The features that some cars had a decade ago ( Advanced  cruise control, blind spot detectors, lane guidance, etc ) would give me several more years of independence.  And features that Tesla has would add even more years than that.  
    I'm sitting here looking at actuarial tables and I won't need much more than what is already available.   But another Decade?   Who knows what's going to be developed.   
      When I landed in a carrier it was all Skill  and judgement. Now  much faster fighters don't manually fly off or land on carriers. That bouncing carrier landed at  160 mph in a decade or 2 old fighter is conquered by automation.  
   Without actually doing it yourself you have no idea of the complexity of landing on a carrier in rough seas at night.  If 20 year old fighters can put the 160 mph plane down on  a 50'x300' area do you really believe a car traveling 50 mph won't be capable of being driven?  

In reply to frenchyd :

Frenchy I hear you, but your proposition is uncomfortable. You are suggesting that these driving aids can enable someone with physical limitations which should restrict their driving to be able to continue driving. 
 

That's not what they were designed for. Using them like that is an abuse of their design intent. 
 

I know this is harsh, but my opinion is that anyone who has physical limitations which inhibit their ability to operate a vehicle safely through the ENTIRE range of the vehicle's capabilities should stop driving. 
 

That's what I encouraged my mother to do. Anything less would have been putting other people at risk. 
 

I am an advocate of re-testing elderly drivers every 5 years. I know you won't like that.